• ■ / < i . ..-,■■■■• 



G^ 



.^^. 



^n ^-^^-f;^ 






>^: 






'\ 



<' 









■^ A V 



^^^^v<- 



o ,1 









4 o 






>"•',*. 



V \,^ ^M/k' \J 








**„*' :'MA: ■V..-** .-SSiS'-, '<■.,»» ' yM'i 



^ 







o 
o 






<^^' "-^W '-Ni^i^V ■^^^ "^^ '^'W^/" <j.-^'^''\ V''.,;t.,.v'' -? 



^^ ,XV'-V 




^ ^''"'^^^'■V 



^x' 






. r^^ 






o V 



o. 





,-?- 



:*^°^> 



v^ 




.0" 



V^. 










'j-s 



^ 



,-j^ 



<Jy 



o V 



-^^ 






^ 





^\^: c:^^^ 




^^0^ 



.^ 



H o^ 



y^ 



^ 



V 



\^ 




s • ' 




^ 






V 










^ 



,0^ 






A 



^ 



v\ 



^ 




















V-^' 



c 



,^^ 



^7 




•n-o^ 




°-^ '■■'■'./ ,.-, %'"°' S"' ... "-^c- '" 








Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/europeinmiddleag01that 



/ 

EUROPE IN 
THE MIDDLE AGE 



^f3^t 



BY 

OLIVER J. THATCHER, Ph.D. 

AND 

EDGAR HOLMES McNEAL, Ph.D. 

PROFESSOR OF EUROPEAN HISTORY IN THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 



WITH MAPS, CHARTS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS 



CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 

NEW YORK CHICAGO BOSTON 



^'' 



B 



"-(^ 



6 



r- 



COPYRIGHT. 1896, 1920, BY 

CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 




SEP28l92pC''A576622 



So 

THE MEMORY OF 

HENRY HARRISON BROWN 
1840-1917 

-'From all Life's grapes he pressed sweet wine.* 



PREFACE 

The greatest factor in the progress of man has been his ability 
to use the experience — the achievements, the successes, and even 
the failures — of the generations that have preceded him. One 
generation stands on the shoulders of that which went before. 
It does not have to puzzle over the problems which its pred- 
ecessor has solved. It need not follow the tortuous path of 
effort and failure which its predecessor followed. It need not 
expend its energy in inventing what has already been invented, 
in discovering what has already been discovered. The hard- 
won achievements of the past become stepping-stones to some- 
thing greater and better. Every age builds on, and with, the 
yesterdays of the race. Of all creatures man alone is able to 
appropriate and to profit by the experiences of his kind. Else 
he would be as the beasts of the field, and progress would be 
impossible for him. The knowledge and appreciation of the 
best things that have been said and done should not only make 
a man cultured; they should also give him the best preparation 
for a life of higher and greater achievement. Does the study 
of history need any further justification? Does the twentieth 
century have less need of a knowledge of the Middle Age than 
of the nineteenth century? Indeed the nineteenth century 
gets its true perspective only when seen in its proper relation 
with the precedent centuries. 

Of the utmost importance is it, therefore, that the achieve- 
ments — intellectual, moral, spiritual, and material — the legacy, 
of an age should be passed on without diminution to its succes- 
sor. For only when an age enters fully and freely on its heritage 
can it carry on the work of civilization at an accelerated speed. 
Failing of this, it must retrograde, and then slowly and with 
great effort find a new way over the lost course which its prede- 



vi PREFACE 

cesser has travelled. Such a catastrophe serves to produce a 
marked contrast between what has gone before and what fol- 
lows, and justifies us in making the convenient, though some- 
what arbitrary, division of history into periods. 

Now, just such a catastrophe in the fourth and fifth centu- 
ries ushered in the long period which we call the Middle Age. 
There is no doubt that, as will be clear from the first chapter of 
this book, there were many agencies at work to cause the peo- 
ple of the Roman empire to retrograde. But the crowning dis- 
aster, which cut nearly all of the western empire off from the 
■legacy of the past, was the invasions of the barbarians. Their 
coming virtually destroyed existing government, both local 
and central; wiped out the schools, one of the chief instru- 
ments for passing on the achievements of one age to the next; 
weakened the administration of justice; and lowered almost to 
their own level the whole tone of society. We are fully justi- 
fied, therefore, in regarding the invasions of the barbarians 
as the beginning of the Middle Age. 

Why, it may be asked, did not the empire, reinforced with 
the high ideals and transforming power of the church, lift the 
barbarians up to its level instead of being brought down to 
theirs? The answer is plain: the more exalted an idea, the 
more difficult for a people that is low in the scale of civilization 
to adopt it. A barbarian people is not civilized by putting on 
civilization as a garment. A people must be fitted by nature 
and by training to appropriate fully — to make completely its 
own — the advanced ideas of a higher civilization. These ideas 
must wait for their complete reception until the whole nature 
of the people has been improved by long, continuous disci- 
pline. 

The history of the Middle Age furnishes abundant proof of 
the truth of these statements. The legacy of the Roman em- 
pire, cut off by the coming of the barbarians, was not wholly 
destroyed but continued to exist, organized in the form of 
literature, law, ideas, and institutions. 

The end of the Middle Age, not less than its beginning, is 
marked by a catastrophe. For, more than a hundred years of 



PREFACE vii 

blighting, ruinous international, civil, and religious wars fol- 
lowed upon that stirring period which we call the Renaissance 
— a period, as we shall see, of voyage and discovery, of epoch- 
making inventions, of the keenest intellectual life, and of the 
most pronounced individualism, a period so full of life and en- 
ergy that it seemed to promise a great acceleration in the proc- 
ess of civilization. So we conveniently end the Middle Age 
and begin the Modern Period with the commencement of those 
wars, which cut off the peoples of Europe from the beautiful 
and inspiring legacy of the Renaissance. 

For another reason we are justified in fixing the beginning of 
the Middle Age at about 350 and the ending at about 1500. 
Changes in the conditions of living produce corresponding 
changes in a people. What were some of the important changes 
in the conditions of living that justify the limits assigned to 
the period ? 

1. As we have already said, the invasions of the barbarians 
virtually destroyed the existing machinery of government, 
both local and imperial, crippled the administration of justice, 
and wiped out the schools. Their wars and ravages were an 
attack on civilization and shook the civilized world on its 
foundations (Chapters II to IV). 

2. At the same time commerce and industry were destroyed 
and almost every community was thereby made dependent on 
itself to supply its wants. The result was a rapid declension 
in the practical arts and the people generally were plunged 
into poverty (Chapter XXIV). In its organization the church 
was, as we shall see, modelled after the empire, and from the 
general wreckage saved all that it could. The church was 
essentially a reorganization of the forces of civilization, and in 
the course of the next thousand years transmitted, gradually 
and piecemeal, much of the legacy of Rome to the barbarians 
whom she slowly Christianized and civilized. There was a 
revival of learning among the Franks in the time of Charle- 
magne, which recovered a part of the legacy of Rome. An- 
other revival in the twelfth century recovered a much larger 
part of it in the form of Roman law and literature. And the 



viii PREFACE 

Renaissance of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was a 
frank attempt to restore and enter again upon the civiHzation 
that had been Rome's. 

3. This poverty, coupled with heavy taxation and with in- 
security of hfe and justice, brought about a great social change 
and a new type of social organization. The middle class tended 
to disappear and there arose a large unfree class, the serfs 
(Chapters I, II, VII, and XXIV). 

4. At the same time the church, with her vast system of ideas 
and practices, became powerful (Chapter VIII). 

5. Asceticism in the form of monasticism became extremely 
popular (Chapter IX). 

With these changed conditions the life of the people was 
profoundly modified and came into strong contrast with the 
life of the preceding centuries. 

At the close of the Middle Age the changes in the conditions 
of living were perhaps even more marked. 

1. The great plague known as the Black Death, which re- 
peatedly ravaged Europe in the fourteenth century, led to a 
profound change in economic and social conditions and relations. 
It diminished serfdom and created a new social type, the free 
day-laborer (Chapter XIX). 

2. Cities had become increasingly numerous and important 
because of their development in industry and commerce, and 
in their rich and powerful population we have a new type of 
social organization, the middle class or third estate (Chapter 
XXIV). 

3. The empire and the papacy, the standard-bearers of the 
idea of world-wide empire, had become decadent (Chapters 
XXI and XXII), and in their place we find strong national 
governments ruled by kings who were ambitious to increase 
their authority at home and their power by conquest abroad. 
The feeling of nationalism was strong (Chapters XVI to XX). 

4. Dissatisfaction with the papacy, which had been growing 
in volume and in intensity (Chapter XXI), culminated in the 
Protestant revolt (15 17), which led to more than a century of 
ruinous war. 



PREFACE ix 

5. The ascetic ideal had lost its power to attract and mo- 
nasticism had declined, and there was a more general feeling 
of joy and delight in this life (Chapter XXVI). 

6. The discovery of America and of sea routes to India were 
only a part of a great period of voyage and discovery which 
opened up new fields of opportunity and endeavor (Chapter 
XXVI). 

7. The Renaissance brought in new ideals in education and in 
art (Chapter XXVI). 

8. And, finally, there were a few epoch-making inventions, 
such as gunpowder, the compass, paper, and movable type 
(Chapter XXVI). 

In writing a brief history of the Middle Age the writer's 
most serious problem is connected with the choice of materials. 
It is impossible always to select out of the immense mass of 
historical materials of the period just those which will meet 
with the approval of his readers, much less that of his fellow his- 
torians. Each one will be influenced by the peculiar bent of his 
own mind, and by the line which his particular studies have 
taken. In general, I have been interested in explaining the 
genesis, the origins, of a movement, rather than in giving 
a detailed history of it. I thought it advisable to describe at 
some length the Roman empire because it is generally slighted in 
text-books, and especially because the Middle Age was de- 
veloped on its ruins and drew from it both materials and in- 
spiration. I have sketched rapidly and broadly the invasions 
of the barbarians and the kingdoms which they established 
within the empire, emphasizing only those details which seemed 
to me of special importance. The beginnings of the Franks, 
on the other hand, seemed to deserve a fuller treatment because 
of the great role which they were destined to play. I have 
written at some length about the imperial coronation of Charle- 
magne, not only because of the far-reaching effect of it but also 
because the character of it has, I think, generally been mis- 
understood. 

In the chapter called ^'The Dissolution of the Empire" I have 
aimed merely to show the great lines of cleavage between the 



X PREFACE 

fragments into which the empire broke. To do this it seemed 
impossible not to introduce a large number of facts and names. 
Surely no teacher will require his students to commit these to 
memory. Their only purpose is to create in the mind a vivid 
and deep impression of the chaotic political conditions that ex- 
isted in Europe about the year 900, and to indicate the lines 
along which some of the nascent states of western Europe were 
to develop. 

The chapter on the development of the papacy also contains 
a large number of facts which are not meant to be committed 
to memory. They merely illustrate the lines along which the 
power of the bishop of Rome was growing and the conditions 
which made that growth possible and even inevitable. Most 
text-books slur over this subject and the student is generally 
left with the idea that somehow the papacy was either the mirac- 
ulous creation of God or the work of scheming, ambitious, and 
unscrupulous bishops of Rome. I have shown the illustrative 
character of much of this material by the free use of foot-notes. 

Monasticism is so foreign to the spirit of to-day that students 
have great difficulty in understanding it. Seen, however, in 
the light of the mental and the material state of the people of 
the third century, monasticism becomes explicable and natural. 
I have therefore spent more time in explaining the origins of 
the movement than in detailing its history. 

In treating the struggle between the empire and the papacy 
I may have been influenced too much by the dramatic character 
of some of its episodes and by the fascination exercised on me 
by bold and effective personalities. I confess my sympathetic 
admiration for the three great popes and the three great emper- 
ors who played the leading r61es in that gigantic struggle. The 
struggle, however, had a tremendous influence on the political 
history of Germany and Italy. 

From another point of view also that struggle is especially 
interesting. From the time of Alexander to the present there 
has appeared, at different times and under somewhat different 
forms, the idea of world domination. Nations and individuals 
have dreamed of reducing the whole world to subjection, of 



PREFACE xi 

increasing their own glory and power by making the whole 
world subject to them. They have sought a place so high in 
the sun as to be able to overshadow all other peoples and in- 
dividuals. Such an ideal is for many reasons alluring. Now, 
in the struggle between papacy and empire we have two as- 
pirants to universal power, for the papacy claimed jurisdic- 
tion over the whole world and the empire had inherited Rome's 
pretensions to universal sway. The course of events in the 
world's history, however, has been away from autocracy toward 
democracy, from world empire toward national self-determina- 
tion. That struggle claims our interest if only for the bigness 
of the ideals and interests involved. 

I admit that the life of Mohammed, viewed narrowly, lies 
outside the field of European history. But in a larger, truer 
sense it may properly find a place there, because for centuries 
there has been a contest between Christian and Mohammedan 
peoples. It began with the attempt of the Mohammedans to 
establish themselves in Europe. The influence of Mohamme- 
dans on Europe has been considerable and, many times, good. 
The contest is far from being ended to-day. There are millions 
of Mohammedans in Europe, Asia, Africa, and the islands of 
the Pacific, and America is in many ways brought into contact 
with them. I have tried therefore to explain Mohammedanism 
by describing its founder. If I have succeeded in hmnanizing 
him, I am content. 

The romantic character of the crusades is no doubt responsible 
for the extended treatment which they have heretofore received 
in text-books on mediaeval history. The first edition of this 
book was the first text-book in English, I believe, to strip Peter 
the Hermit of his false honors and to portray the first crusade 
in its true character. The futility of the crusades as an effort 
to regain the Holy Land has led me to give them a brief treat- 
ment at the cost, perhaps, of much material that is romantic 
and full of color. I have not, however, slighted the effects of the 
crusades on Europe, although I have not followed those undis- 
criminating historians who have attributed every important 
change in Europe after 1190 to the inffiience of the crusades. 



xii • PREFACE 

The remaining chapters will, I think, require no further ex- 
planation or apology. 

I consider myself extremely fortunate in having had the help 
of Professor Edgar Holmes McNeal, of the Ohio State Uni- 
versity. He has written the chapter on feudalism and the 
several chapters on France and England, as well as some pages 
of the chapter on ''Civilization and Culture." Although he is 
in no way responsible for the shortcomings of the chapters 
which I have written, his criticisms and suggestions have been 
extremely helpful to me. 

A feature of the book which I believe will be very helpful 
to both teachers and students, and also to the general reader, 
will be found in the copious marginal references to available 
source-books. S. B. refers to Thatcher and McNeal's Source 
Book for MedicBval History; R. refers to Robinson's Readings; 
O. refers to Ogg's Source Book, and M. refers to Munro's Source 
Book for Roman History; A. and S., to Adams and Stephens, 
Select Documents of English Constitutional History; L., to Lee's 
Source Book of English History; Ch., to Cheyney's Selections 
from the Sources of English History. The references are made 
to the numbers of the selections, and not to the pages. 

Oliver J. Thatcher. 

Beaumont, California. 



CONTENTS 



Preface 



PAGE 
V 



Introduction 



CHAPTER 



I. The Roman Empire to 476 A. D 10 



II. The Invasions of the Germans and the Es- 
tablishment OF German Kingdoms on 
Roman Soil 

III. Justinian and the Reaction against the Ger- 

mans 

IV. The Franks 

V. The House of Charlemagne 



VI. The Dissolution of the Empire of Charle 
magne 



VII. Feudalism 

VIII. The Development of the Papacy 

IX. Monasticism ....... 

X. Germany and the Empire, 919-1056 



XI. The Struggle between Papacy and Empire 

The First Period (1073-1152) . . 

XII. The Struggle between Papacy and Empire 
The Second Period (ii 52-1198) . 

XIII. The Struggle between Papacy and Empire 

The Third Period (i 198-1254) . . . 

xiii 



34 

50 
61 

77 

lOO 

116 
139 
I6S 

182 

199 
222 
236 



xiv CONTENTS 

CHAPTER PAGE 

XIV. Mohammed and Mohammedanism 253 

XV. The Crusades 275 

XVI. The Growth of the French Nation . . . 308 

XVII. The Origins of the English Nation . . . 331 

XVUI. The Formation of the English Nation . .342 

XIX. The Hundred Years' War — First Part . . 367 

XX. The Hundred Years' War — Second Part . . 382 

XXI. The Decline of the Temporal Power of the 

Papacy (i 250-1 500) 403 

XXII. Germany from 1250 to 1500 414 

XXIII. The Remaining Countries of Europe . . . 425 

XXIV. The Cities and City Life; Industrial Life and 

^ Commerce; Wayfaring Life 435 

XXV. Civilization and Culture in the Middle Age 456 

XXVI. The Renaissance ' . . . . 496 

Bibliography 509 

Chronological Tables 515 

Index 529 



ILLUSTRATIONS 

The castle of Arques in Normandy .... Facing page 132 

The castle of Coucy, about 1225 " " 134 

Section of the Bayeux tapestry " " 136 

Effigy of an English noble " " 136 

Warrior kneeling " " 136 

Examples of Romanesque architecture Between pages 490 and 491 

Examples of Gothic architecture . . " " 490 " 491 

Types of vaults and examples of Gothic 

architecture " " 490 " 491 

Stained glass of Notre-Dame-de-Cha- 
tres — paintings "Siege of Jericho" 
and "St. Justina" — missal "The 

Marriage at Cana" " " 490 " 491 

Examples of early decorative church 

sculpture " " 490 " 491 

Examples of Renaissance sculpture . " " 490 " 491 

Examples of Renaissance architecture " " 490 " 491 

Examples of Renaissance painting . " " 490 " 491 

Examples of Renaissance painting and 

sculpture (Moses) ..... " ** 490 " 491 



MAPS 

I. Physical map of Europe and the Medi- 
terranean Basin Facing page 4 

II. Europe, 350 A. D., showing the Roman 

Empire and Barbarians .... " " 12 

III. Germanic kingdoms established on 

Roman soil (about 500 A. D.) . . " " 40 

IV. Kingdom of the Merovingians, show- 

ing their conquests " " 66 

V. The empire of Charlemagne, at his 

death (814), showing his conquests . " " 88 

VI. The division of Verdun, 843, showing 
the beginning of France and Ger- 
many " " 104 

VII. The empire in the time of Otto the 

Great " "188 

VIII. Kingdom of Burgundy (Aries), 1032 . " *' 192 

IX. The Norman kingdom of Sicily, estab- 
lished 1 130 " " 194 

X. Arabia . " ''262 

XI. The Crusades " "296 

XII. France (West Francia) under the late 

Carolingians " " 310 

XIII. France under Philip Augustus, 1180- 

1223 " "316 

XIV. English kingdoms in the eighth cen- 

tury ... " "336 

XV. England after Alfred's treaty with the 

Danes, 886 " " 338 

xvii 



XVlll 



MAPS 



XVI. France during the Hundred Years' 

War Facing page 384 



XVII. Possessions of Charles the Bold . 

XVIII. Germany in the fifteenth century . 

XIX. The Swiss Confederation in the fif- 
teenth century 



XX. City groups and connecting trade 
routes 

XXI. Language frontier between the Ro- 
mance and Germanic peoples . 



394 
418 

422 

446 

484 



EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

INTRODUCTION 

The earth is not merely the scene or stage on which history- 
has been enacted, but by its physical forms and climate it has 
also affected the course of history. It is, therefore, necessary 
to keep in mind the physical geography of Europe, and to be 
constantly on the watch for its effects on the development of 
the peoples and states of Europe. Keeping in view the gen- 
eral character of this book, it would be out of place to do more 
than call attention to its mountain systems, its plains, its coast, 
its river systems, and its climate, and the effects which they 
tend to have on the life of its peoples. 

Because of its varied natural conditions Europe is better 
fitted than any other continent to develop a high civilization. 
It has the advantage of size because it and Asia are so joined 
that they form but one great land mass and are, therefore, but 
one continent; it is fortunate in its zonal situation, for, al- 
though it extends from the tropical to the arctic, the most of 
it lies in the temperate zone; it has a great variety of rehef 
and contour, being rich in mountains, valleys, and plains; it 
has a varied climate; its river systems are admirably arranged 
to promote travel and commerce; its rainfall is abundant and 
fairly well distributed; its flora and fauna are richly diversified; 
it has, in proportion to its area, the greatest length of coast- 
line, with a large number of good harbors, and, on the whole, 
an excellent coastal zone. 

Mountains act as natural barriers to communication be- 
tween peoples separated by them, and tend to prevent war and 
to hinder commerce, the interchange of ideas, and the spread 
of civilization. Their effectiveness as barriers depends on the 
length of their chain, their height, their abruptness, and the 



2 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

number and character of their passes. They are Hkely to be- 
come permanent boundaries between states, races, and lan- 
guages. Although they protect, they also isolate, and isola- 
tion may cause lethargy in a people. An isolated people must 
of itself develop its own resources and powers if it will keep 
pace with other nations. The greater the contact between 
two peoples, the more stimulating it is likely to be to both. 

The influence of mountains on historical development may 
be illustrated by a brief statement of some of the effects which 
they have had on certain countries of Europe. Thus, the 
Pyrenees have protected Spain against successful 
Pyrenees. aggression from Europe, but at the same time its 
people show the effects of isolation and the lack of 
stimulating contact with other peoples. The presence of Mo- 
hammedans in Spain from 711 to 1492 offset the ill effects of 
isolation by furnishing a strong internal stimulus to the Span- 
iards, which since then has been lacking. And, since the Pyre- 
nees and the sea have together shut out foreign stimulus also, 
Spain has declined in the last four hundred years. 

Again, although the Alps have not prevented northern powers 
from attempting to conquer and rule Italy, they have, in the 
long run, made all such attempts futile. Of all the countries 
bordered by the Alps Italy is the most unfortunate, because 
(i) the Alps are much more abrupt on the south than else- 
where, thus giving a northern invader the strategic advantage 
of a swift and sudden descent, and (2) all the passes, of which 
there are many, converge on the plain of the Po, enabling an 
enemy to invade the country by several passes at the same 
time, yet promptly unite all his troops as soon as they emerge 
from the mountains. 

The Balkans are a continuation of the Alps, separating the 
Balkan peninsula from the valley of the lower Danube. The 
Balkan peninsula is extremely mountainous, and the segre- 
gating influence of mountains is seen in the formation of so 
many little Balkan states, such as Bosnia, Herzegovina, Servia, 
Montenegro, Bulgaria, and Greece. 

The series of mountain chains and groups which surround 



INTRODUCTION 3 

Bohemia on all sides except the south had the effect, during the 
Middle Age, of preserving the Bohemians against the influences 
which the Germans brought to bear upon them from the west 
and north. But for the existence of these mountains it is 
probable that the Germans, who were vigorously pushing their 
conquests to the east, would have conquered and germanized 
the Bohemians, as they did all their Slavic neighbors on the 
north between the Elbe and Vistula. Similarly the Hungarians 
have been protected from aggression on three sides by the Car- 
pathians, which, like the mountains around Bohemia, put an 
effectual barrier in the way of German expansion. And now, 
after centuries of foreign domination and bitter struggle to pre- 
serv^e their nationality, these little nations are to profit by the 
modern principle of "self-determination," and are to have an 
opportunity to develop themselves freely along their peculiar 
national Unes. 

The Caucasus and the Ural Mountains make a natural bound- 
ary between Europe and Asia, forming a barrier to easy com- 
munication between the two continents and forcing travel and 
commerce, as well as invading peoples and armies, to follow cer- 
tain well-defined routes. 

Let us return to the Alps and look at their influence in other 
directions. Because they were an effective barrier to the 
spread of Roman civilization toward the north, central Europe 
received it, in a roundabout way and second-hand, from the 
Gauls and the peoples living along the Danube. The influ- 
ence of the Alps as a barrier is well illustrated by the fact that 
the Germans received Christianity by way of the Rhone and 
the Danube.. 

Switzerland furnishes a fine example of the protecting and 
segregating influence of mountains. The cantons (counties) 
that were situated in the deep, retired valleys of the Alps were 
so secure and so isolated in their mountain fastnesses that they 
felt little or no need of a strong central government. Almost 
every valley in the Alps has sought independence. The segre- 
gating environment of the mountains which shut them in has 
caused political dismemberment and a lack of cohesion in the 



' UL 






4 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

cantons. Nothing but the danger of being conquered by a 
common foe has been able to bring the cantons together. 
Threatened encroachments by their stronger neighbors have 
forced them to unite to form the Swiss repubUc. The moun- 
tain cantons have yielded grudgingly to the necessity of a cen- 
tral government and still oppose every attempt to strengthen it. 

The history of Scotland shows constant feuds between High- 
landers and Lowlanders, tribes and clans. These petty divi- 
sions among the people, so deep-seated in the Scotchman's 
heart, are due to the segregating environment of mountains, 
gorges, and deep inlets. 

In mountainous countries agriculture offers scant returns. 
Short summers and long, cold winters add to the difficulties of 
making a living, and so in virtually all mountains we find vari- 
ous *' winter" industries practised "on the side,'' in order to 
supplement the meagre income obtained from the soil during 
the summer. These winter industries vary from one region to 
another. Thus the Swiss peasants spend their winters in 
making wood carvings, watches, clocks, and lace; lace is made 
also in some of the mountains of Germany and of Italy; peasants 
of the Black Forest are famous for their clocks; other moun- 
tain regions are noted for the manufacture of dolls and toys. 

Because it is so difficult to make a living in the Alps the 
women of Switzerland have, for some centuries, done nearly 
all the work in the fields, and the young men have sought a 
livelihood in foreign lands. They became famous as merce- 
nary troops in many European countries, but after the aboli- 
tion of mercenary armies in the nineteenth century they sought 
more peaceable forms of employment and became hotel man- 
agers, couriers, and waiters. Thousands of them spend the 
winters in the "winter" resorts around the Mediterranean, 
and the summers in Switzerland, which is usually filled at that 
season with tourists. 

In modern times, however^ mountains have been found to 
possess new sources of wealth, since they are frequently rich in 
mineral deposits, and their streams and waterfalls furnish an 
almost unlimited amount of electrical power. 



Note to Map I. — Use this map to illustrate the points made in the in- 
troductory chapter. The important principle to be observed is the influence 
of physical or natural geography upon political and social history. Notice the 
extensive coast line of the continent, made by deep inlets, such as the Baltic, 
the Gulf of Finland, the Adriatic, the ^Egean, and the Black Sea. Observe 
the effect of the mountain systems on political boundaries, etc. Note the 
important cities on the coast: Calais, Liibeck, Danzig, Marseilles, Genoa, 
Venice, and the very advantageous position of Constantinople, commanding 
the only waterway to the Black Sea and its shores. The river systems are 
great natural highwaj'^s, especially in a time in which roads are not well 
maintained or policed because of disorderly political conditions; see how 
completely Europe is provided with such systems. Note also the fact that 
nearly all the important cities are on or near main river routes. 



10 



if^Py r ^ 3 Ad in' 




30 



PHYSICAL MAP OF EUROPE 

AND THE 

MEDITERRANEAN BASIN 



L.L. POATESCO., N.Y. 

Longitude 



West 



Longitude 



East 



10 



from 



INTRODUCTION 5 

For travel, trade, and war mountain passes are important 
because they furnish the only direct means of communication 
between the countries which the mountains separate. In an- 
cient times they offered the only favorable sites for the con- 
struction of connecting roads, and in modern times they are 
generally followed by the railroads. Because of the traffic that 
passes over them settlements are formed near their ends, which 
often grow into cities. This will be apparent if you will con- 
sult your map and locate the chief passes of the Alps, such as 
the Brenner, the St. Gothard, the Simplon, and the Mt. Ge- 
nevre, and observe the cities that are grouped about their ends. 

On the other hand, great plains offer every opportunity for 
the development of peoples into homogeneity, and for the 
formation of governments with extensive sway. That explains, 
in part at least, why a single government has for 
many centuries been able to embrace the great 
plain of eastern Europe, although in the early Middle Age it, 
like western Europe, was the home of many independent tribes 
and races. A government resting on arms, such as has existed 
in Russia, finds it comparatively easy to extend its sway by 
the conquest of peoples that, living in a great plain and lacking 
the natural protection which is furnished by mountains, are 
easily overcome by superior numbers, no matter how brave 
and liberty-loving they are. The fate of the many peoples of 
Russia is in strong contrast with that of the peoples of Switzer- 
land, who, under the protecting shadow of their mountains, 
have been able to beat off all aggressors and to maintain their 
^liberty and independence. 

Extensive plains seem to invite their inhabitants to expand 
politically. The valleys of the Seine and the Loire are essen- 
tially one, and it is a noteworthy fact, as we shall see in Chap- 
ter XVI, that on them was based the royal power which ex- 
panded to take in all France. They formed the centre about 
which all the rest of France was centralized. 

In the same way Prussia, beginning with the flat plain of 
Brandenburg, has expanded to take in all the low plains lying 
south of the Baltic. Prussian statesmen followed the policy of 



6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

absorbing the little principalities that lay helpless around 
them, and the logic of events demanded that eventually Hol- 
land, Luxemburg, and at least a part of Belgium be added to 
the territory of Prussia, had not the war of 1914-1918 resulted 
in the breaking of Prussian power. Now it seems that these 
countries are to have a safe and independent existence through 
the principle of "self-determination," a principle that bids fair 
soon to have universal application, even to the backward, un- 
civilized peoples of Africa, and to stop the exploitation of the 
weaker peoples by the stronger. 

A nation or state occup)dng a plain may of course become 
great in spite of its lack of natural boundaries, but only on con- 
dition that its people are held together and possess great 
prowess in war. Poland, once a great state, had no natural 
frontiers, and its downfall was greatly facilitated by its lack of 
a protecting boundary. 

Like mountains, the sea protects and isolates. By develop- 
ing an extensive naval commerce a people may make use of 
the sea to overcome the injurious effects of their isolation by 
The Sea ^^* ^*' ^^^^ England furnishes a fine example. 
Protects and Naval commerce, however, depends largely on the 
existence of good harbors, and of these some coun- 
tries have many, while others, with a much longer coast-line, 
may have none. Isolation may be either a source of strength 
or a cause of weakness. Thus Spain and England are much 
alike in their isolation; but Spain has suffered from its isolation, 
because the Spaniards have neither developed the natural re- 
sources of their country nor built up a great naval commerce, 
while England, under the protection of its isolation, has grown 
great by doing both. Europe is fortunate in possessing more 
coast-line in proportion to its area than any other continent. 
This is due to the fact that it is essentially a peninsula, merely 
an extension of Asia, and is composed of peninsulas, being 
deeply indented by arms of the sea. In comparison with other 
continents it is rich in harbors. Its great inland seas offer 
excellent opportunities for the pursuit of commerce. It is not 
accidental that European commerce develof>ed first on and 



INTRODUCTION 7 

around the Mediterranean and then the Baltic, and that the 
chief commercial cities were in those regions. 

The Mediterranean has played an important role in history. 
Three continents meet around it, and, since it offers an easy 
means of communication, it has aided in the spread of civiHza- 
tion. The peoples on its shores have easily assimilated the 
culture of each other. Because of the mountains on the north 
of it and the desert on the south, it does not receive many im- 
portant rivers, so that its tributary territory is comparatively 
small. In this respect the Baltic is far more fortunate, since 
it receives many large rivers; and even the Black Sea, which 
receives some important rivers, surpasses it in the extent and 
importance of its tributary territory. 

Rivers are not good barriers and therefore are not elective 
frontiers. On the contrary, since they are convenient and 
ready-made highways, they serve rather to connect than to 
separate. In its river systems also Europe is more 
Highway^^. fortunate than other continents. Its numerous 
rivers could hardly be arranged so as to make 
travel and commerce easier. They rise, generally speaking, in 
the central part of the continent, so that the sources of those 
flowing north are near the sources of others flowing south. By 
a short portage the Rhine and the rivers of France are con- 
nected with one another and with the Rhone and its tributaries; 
in the same way the Rhine, the Main, the Elbe, and the Oder 
are connected with the Danube; and the Vistula, the Niemen, 
and the Duna, with the Dniester, the Dnieper, the Don, and 
the Volga. The importance of rivers as highways may be seen 
in the fact that those inland cities of Europe that have flour- 
ished have been, almost without exception, situated on a river. 
Furthermore, we know that the rivers of Europe have from the 
earHest times been used as highways by merchants and trav- 
ellers. Long before Christ the Greeks, who bought tin in Corn- 
wall, found that the easiest way to England was by boat across 
the Mediterranean and up the Rhone, then afoot to the Loire 
or Seine, and again by boat to the shores of Cornwall. We 
know also that during the Middle Age Scandinavian merchants 



8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

sailed across the Baltic, crossed the land to the Volga, down 
which they sailed to the Caspian, and carried on a brisk trade 
with the peoples around that sea, because large numbers of 
coins made by those peoples have been found along the Volga 
and in the lands around the Baltic. And pilgrims from Scan- 
dinavia preferred to go to the Holy Land by way of the Baltic, 
the Dnieper, the Black Sea, and the Mediterranean rather than 
by the land route through France, Germany, and the Balkan 
peninsula. 

The most imp>ortant factors in climate are heat and cold, 
moisture and aridity, the distribution of rainfall, and the pre- 
vailing winds. Although the influence of climate on a people 
is, in some respects, less tangible than that of moun- 
tarns and rivers, it is not less real. It is indeed 
difficult to measure the varied yet subtle influence of climate on 
the temperament of a people. It is easy, however, to see that 
in the cold zones conditions would make the struggle for exist- 
ence hard and unremitting, while in the warmer regions the 
prodigality of nature might easily beget slothfulness. Climate 
alone determines the fauna and flora of a country, which are 
matters of decisive importance to its inhabitants. Climate 
affects a people's dress, occupations, social Hfe and habits, 
and its architecture, both public and private. Climate may 
also be a protection against foreign aggression. 
Fevi° Thus, throughout the Middle Age the ItaHan cli- 

mate did more than Italian arms to protect the 
freedom of the Italian cities against the imperial pretensions 
of the German emperors, because no German army was able to 
withstand Italian fevers. Europe is fortunate in that, al- 
though its climate ranges from the subtropical to the arctic, 
by far the larger part of it has a temperate climate, due in a 
measure to the Gulf Stream or the warm waters of the north 
Atlantic drift. And it is a fact that man has made the most 
progress in the temperate zone. 

No one can deny the great and varied influence of these fac- 
tors which made up the physical environment of the peoples 



INTRODUCTION g 

whose history we are about to study. But of far greater im- 
portance in this history are the psychical factors, for 

" Man is not dust, man is not dust, I say ! 
A lightning substance thro' his being runs. 
A flame he knows not of illumes his clay — 
The cosmic fire that feeds the swarming suns." 

Man is mind, and mind is master over matter. Through the 
power of his mind man has achieved whatever supremacy he 
enjoys. Under the overmastering urge of ideas and ideals he 
has won a substantial and ever-increasing domination over his 
physical environment; he has spanned the rivers, pierced the 
mountains with tunnels, wrested a livelihood from the trackless 
waste of the sea and the scarcely less inhospitable regions of 
the frozen north and the arid desert; he has made wind and 
wave serve him; by his means of rapid transit he has brought 
the ends of the earth together, and by his command of elec- 
tricity he has annihilated space; he competes even with the 
fish of the sea and with the birds of the air for supremacy in 
their domains. The measure of the superiority of mind over 
matter may be gauged by the conquest which man has achieved 
over nature. History, in the truest sense, is the record of man's 
conquest of nature and of himself. That is, it is the record of 
the mind of man. *'The history of the state sketches in coarse 
outline the progress of thought, and follows at a distance the 
delicacy of culture and of aspiration." The great factors of 
civilization are psychic and not material. 



CHAPTER I 
THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 

Under a republican form of government the city of Rome 

had made extensive conquests in Europe, Asia, and Africa. 

It seemed, however, unequal to the task of governing its wide 

realm, partly because it had extended its sway 

Octavian ^ ' ^ ^ i i -, ^ c • 

Becomes faster than it had developed the structure of its gov- 
Holding^AU crnment. The conqueror had outrun the statesman, 
the High Taking advantage of opportunities, Octavian (31 

B. C.-14 A. D.) cleverly acquired control and 
gradually changed the republic to an empire. In doing this, 
however, he prudently made concessions to the sentiments 
of the people by observing and preserving as far as possible 
the existing political forms of the republic. Fearing to usurp 
authority, he had it conferred on him in due form by the 
senate. He did not destroy the high offices of the state, but 
caused himself to be elected to all of them, either for many 
years or for life. These offices had been so arranged that their 
holders would act as a check on each other, but now, since 
Octavian held them all, there was no one who had the authority 
to call him to account. His grip on the state was so firm that 
no one dared oppose his re-election, and consequently he held 
all the high offices so long that the Romans became accustomed 
to their union in one person. Thus these various offices fused 
to make one — that of emperor. 

These offices conferred on Octavian extensive powers which 
under his successors tended to become absolute. By virtue of 
his tribunician power {potestas trihunicia) he exercised supreme 
Tends to authority in civil affairs, could veto the action of 
Become all magistrates, and convoke the senate and the 

popular assembly for the transaction of business. 
By virtue of his proconsular power {imperium proconsulare) he 
controlled the army, the navy, and those provinces which, being 

10 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. ii 

still in an unsettled state, required the presence of troops. By 
a special act of the senate his proconsular power was extended 
to Rome. As high priest {pontifex maximus) he exercised au- 
thority over all religious matters. His pre-eminence in the 
state was indicated by two titles, Augustus (imperial majesty), 
and princeps (foremost citizen, hence, ruler). As the magistrate 
of the people he conducted all negotiations with foreign powers, 
and declared war and made peace. He had a large and increas- 
ing influence in jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases. 
Indirectly he influenced the courts and controlled the senate 
when it sat as a court. The legislative power was under his 
control. The early emperors did not assume the lawmaking 
power, but of course prepared bills for the senate and popular 
assemblies to adopt. The emperor had the coinage of gold and 
silver, and he controlled taxation and deposed and created sena- 
tors. His actual power effectually awed the senate and the pop- 
ular assembly, and, no matter how great his vices or excesses, 
there was no effective means of removing him from office. The 
high position of an emperor did not, however, protect him 
against rebellion and the assassin's dagger. 

Even in the days of the republic the sovereign authority of 
the state was absolute. The state demanded unqualified 
obedience and submission from all. In theory the people were 
sovereign, but they had delegated their sovereignty to the state, 
that is, to the officials whom they had chosen. Augustus merely 
took the place of all the magistrates, and hence acquired all 
the sovereignty that had been vested in them. He became the 
state, which was the visible form of the majesty and sover- 
eignty of the Roman people. Roman sovereignty in the hands 
of the emperor did not become more imperious or absolute 
than it had been in the hands of the magistrates of the republic. 
Hence, in the absolutism of Augustus there was nothing new 
except that it was centralized in the hands of one man and was 
no longer in the hands of a number of magistrates. 

The change from a republic to an empire was in many re- 
spects beneficial. It put an end to the disorders and lawless- 
ness caused by the civil strife of the last years of the republic. 



12 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

By an efficient police system the emperors put down brigandage 
and cleared the roads of robbers and the sea of pirates. They 

gave a new impetus to the construction of roads and 
Emperors to the erection of temples and baths both in Rome 
ChdUzation ^^^^ ^^ Other cities. Most of them encouraged 

the cities by giving them the Latin law (ius Latii), 
in accordance with which they governed themselves much after 
the model of Rome. Generally each municipality had (i) a 
popular assembly, (2) a senate, and (3) two bodies of magis- 
trates, one of which administered justice and convoked the 
senate, while the other controlled the police and other matters. 
The emperors exercised a wise oversight over the provinces and 
secured good government for them. They attempted to in- 
crease the free population of Italy (which had been diminishing 
for some time) by legislating against divorce, by making gifts 
to the parents of large families, and by creating a fund for the 
care of poor children and orphans, to prevent them from be- 
coming slaves or coloni (an unfree, perpetual renter class), and 
for making loans to farmers at a low rate of interest — activities 
that are comparable to some modern legislation that is consid- 
ered radical, and in some quarters even dangerous, such as 
providing for orphans through mothers' pensions, and the system 
of rural credits and farm loans. In their effort to produce a re- 
vival in reUgion they restored old temples, built new ones, and 
frequented them, taking a personal part in the various religious 
cults which were practised. In imperial legislation there ap- 
peared a new spirit of humaneness, due in large measure to the 
spread of the idea of the brotherhood of man {ius naturale), 
which was promulgated by Seneca, Epictetus, and other Stoic 
philosophers. Above all, the provinces outside of Italy prof- 
ited by the change in the form of government. Under the re- 
public they had suffered much at the hands of corrupt gov- 
ernors, tax-gatherers, and capitalists, but the emperor showed 
that he had their welfare at heart by putting over them honest, 
capable, well-trained governors, with long tenure of office, and 
making them responsible directly to himself. Consequently 
the provinces entered on an era of prosperity, and progressed 



'Qf-V^c/v-v W\ 



Note to Map II. — Note the location of races in Europe. The descendants 
of the Roman provincials make the "Latin peoples" of to-day in France, 
Spain, and Italy. The small part of the Celts that never came under Roman 
influence were in the remote comers, Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. Cen- 
tral Europe east of the Rhine and north of the Danube, as far as the Vistula, 
was occupied by German tribes, without definite boundaries and often shift- 
'ng. Note the location of those tribes that were later to pour into the Roman 
Empire: East Goths, West Goths, Vandals, Burgundians, Lombards, 
Franks. East of the German tribes were the Slavs; they were to advance 
westward over lands left vacant by the Germans when the latter invaded 
the empire (see Map III). The Huns at this time were advancing from 
Asia across southern Russia; they were to penetrate to the middle Danube, 
and then recede without leaving permanent traces. 




eenwich 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 13 

in civilization more rapidly than ever before. Furthermore, 
the emperors encouraged the provdncials, as all the free people 
outside of Italy were called, by liberally conferring Roman 
citizenship upon them. So great was the progress made in 
this direction that in 212 A. D. the emperor, Caracalla, recog- 
nized the fact that the provincials were virtually on the same 
plane of civilization as the Romans by conferring Roman citizen- 
ship on all the free inhabitants of the empire. He did this, 
however, in order that he might tax them. 

Although the emperor's power was actually almost absolute, 
it must be said that from the time of Octavian to Diocletian 
(31 B. C.-284 A. D.) the government was technically and the- 
oretically a diarchy; that is, the emperor shared 
Diarchy!^^ the authority with the senate. In practice, how- 
ever, the senate was dependent on imperial favor. 
Some of the emperors treated it with outward deference at 
least, and permitted it to preserve a show of its authority, while 
others treated it with supreme contempt and trampled on all 
its rights. The emperor kept control of the army, for in the 
division of territory between him and the senate the latter re- 
ceived only those provinces in which, peace having been estab- 
lished, the presence of troops was not necessary. The emperor 
also controlled the appointment of the governors of the sena- 
torial provinces, and every senatorial province in which a dis- 
turbance arose passed at once from the control of the senate 
into his hands. He could reduce the senate to subjection by 
deposing all its members who opposed him or who were in any 
way obnoxious to him, or by bringing a charge of treason 
{crimen maiestatis) against them. By conferring senatorial rank 
on provincials he changed the character of the senate; from an 
aristocracy of Rome it became an aristocracy of the empire. 
Senate' '^^^ change, however, did not increase its influence 

Power on the government. Its legislative powers, which 

Declines. 

had originally been very broad, dwindled steadily 
because of imperial encroachments. The senate, which had 
acquired the right to elect all magistrates, continued to exer- 
cise that right, but even here its power was formal because the 



14 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

emperor nominated all candidates. Perhaps the most im- 
portant power of the senate was that of electing the emperor 
and of conferring his constitutional powers on him. Its right 
to elect the emperor was, however, soon curtailed. For the 
emperor usually succeeded in naming his successor and so 
made the office hereditary, while the army (either the pretorian 
guard at Rome or the legions in the provinces) frequently 
usurped authority in the matter and created an emperor of its 
own choice. 

Matters went well enough till the third century, when the 
whole imperial system seemed to be breaking down. The chief 
trouble arose from the fact that not only the whole army but 
Th El t* even a single legion, as well as the pretorian guard. 
Law Breaks assumed the right to create and depose the emperor. 
From i8o to 284, although there were more than 
thirty actual emperors, they were outnumbered by the usurpers. 
The soldiers sometimes put to death one emperor and elected 
another merely for the gifts which the newly elected emperor 
must give them; on one occasion they even sold the crown 
to the highest bidder. Usurpers appeared in many provinces, 
and because of their distance from Rome were able to maintain 
themselves for some time. Disastrous wars with the Parthians 
(their territory was about the same as the modern Kohistan) 
also caused the loss of the eastern provinces, and, to add 
to the confusion, German tribes dwelling beyond the Danube 
and the Rhine made numerous incursions into the empire, 
ravaging and devastating it. To the general dissolution of the 
empire many other causes — some of them both 
DecUrfe^ cause and effect — contributed. Here we can men- 
tion only a few of them: heavy and unwise taxation, 
extravagant expenditure of the state's funds, depreciation and 
debasement of the currency, the too rapid growth of imperialism 
at the expense of local autonomy and the feeling of nationality, 
pauperizing, free-corn laws, the lack of a system of credits, or 
banking system, able to support the industrial and commercial 
life of the empire, the decline of agriculture, and the increasing 
degeneracy of the Italian stock. 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 15 

Of this list the last two items deserve a word of explanation. 
For some centuries there had been in progress a ruinous eco- 
nomic change. The land was passing into the hands of a few 

great landholders, and the small, free landholder 
Land-T^enure. ^'^^ disappearing. These immense farms, or estates 

(laiif undid), were tilled by an unfree class of per- 
petual renters, or lease-holders, called coloni, who were attached 
by law to the soil, and hence could never migrate from it. The 
burdens of taxation fell on them, because they were the pro- 
ducing class. Their landlords exacted more and more from 
them until they sank into a state of wretched poverty. Their 
power of production steadily diminished. When they could no 
longer produce enough to meet the taxes demanded of them, 
the landlords were, of course, held responsible for the pa)rment, 
and so they also were ruined. Consequently, much of the land 
that had been under cultivation was in time abandoned and 
became waste. Probably no other cause contributed more to 
the general decline of the Roman empire than this system of 
land-tenure and agriculture, so disastrous and far-reaching 
were its efifects. Indirectly it led the emperors, who were com- 
pelled to seek an income from other sources, to introduce burden- 
some monopolies, and it put upon the governjnent the almost 
impossible task of finding a sufficient supply of food for the 
cities. Furthermore, it brought about the ruin of the industrial 
class in the cities because they could no longer sell the output 
of their factories to a people that had become impoverished. 

Fortunately for the empire, a succession of able and deter- 
mined emperors checked the threatened dissolution by destroy- 
ing the usurpers and repelling for a while the barbarian invaders. 

Diocletian (284-305), the real founder of the later 
Reform. Roman empire, reorganized the whole administra- 

M., 204. tive system and made the government a monarchy 

by stripping the senate of even its show of power 
and by concentrating all authority in the hands of the emperor. 
Experience had shown that the task of governing so extensive 
an empire exceeded the powers of one man. Diocletian deter- 
mined that there should be two emperors, both called Augustus, 



i6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

one of them in the east, the other in the west; each should ap- 
point an assistant, at the same time adopting him and confer- 
ring on him the title of Caesar, a name which, since the time of 
Hadrian (i 17-138), had been given by the emperor to the man 
whom he had adopted and named as his successor. In case of 
the death of an emperor his Caesar should succeed him at once, 
and, in any event, at the end of twenty years the emperors 
should resign and be succeeded by their respective Caesars, who 
were then to create and adopt two new Caesars. 

The emperor was further protected by being declared to be 
a god; he was surrounded by a court and an elaborate system 
of etiquette so that those who approached him had to observe 
a fixed ceremonial, as if they were entering the presence of a 
god. He wore an imperial diadem and was clothed in a mag- 
nificent purple robe made gorgeous with gems and precious 
stones. Not only was his person sacred, but his palace, his 
treasury, his bedchamber, and his government (imperium) were 
called sacred (sacer). He himself was called master and god 
(dominus ac deus), and divine honors were paid him even dur- 
ing his lifetime. 

Diocletian increased the authority of his office, for in all that 
he did he disregarded the senate. He vested in the emperors 
all power to legislate for the empire. The senate, being thus 
Th s t deprived of its two most important powers — the 
without electoral and the legislative — could no longer be 

considered an imperial body. Thereafter its activi- 
ties hardly extended beyond local Roman affairs. The ancient 
magistracies had already lost their importance for the empire 
and had become merely municipal offices of Rome. One of the 
essential features of Diocletian's system was the complete sepa- 
Civil and ration of the civil and military systems, each of 
Military which was Organized in a bureaucratic way under a 
head who was responsible to the emperor. For the 
purposes of administration Diocletian divided the empire into 
four prefectures, putting a pretorian prefect over each; he 
divided each prefecture into dioceses, each under a governor, 
and each diocese into provinces, each under a provincial gov- 



(T 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 17 

ernor. Diocletian took the prefecture of the east (Thrace, Asia 
Minor, Syria, and Egypt), with his residence at Nicomedia; his 
Caesar, Galerius, exercised authority in the prefecture 
Dioceses, of Illyricum (the rest of the Balkan peninsula and 
the provinces of the lower Danube), with his resi- 
dence at Sirmium (now Metrovitz, on the Save River); Max- 
imian, the other emperor, took the prefecture of Italy (Italy, 
the provinces of the middle Danube, and Africa), with his resi- 
dence at Milan; to his Caesar, Constantius, he assigned the pre- 
fecture of Gaul (Gaul, Spain, and Britain), with his residence 
at Treves. Over each prefecture there was a pretorian prefect, 
with extensive powers over civil matters; he heard appeals, 
managed the imperial finances, and controlled the governors of 
the dioceses and of the provinces. Diocletian put the admin- 
istration of military matters in each prefecture in the hands of 
a number of officials (magistri militum), and further subdivided 
the prefectures into military districts, each under a duke or 
count. Both administrations were organized bureaucratically, 
the officials rising in dignity and importance from the lowest to 
the highest. 

The social classification of the inhabitants of the empire was 
also gradually modified. At the bottom of the social scale there 
was a constantly increasing servile class, among which there 
^, ^, , were many gradations in the degree of servitude. 

TheUnfree. ^ , , 11- 

In the country slavery was changed mto serfdom 
because, in order that the number of the tillers of the soil might 
not be diminished, masters were forbidden to sell their slaves, 
who were then entered on the tax-lists with the soil, and hence 
became attached to it, and were bought and sold with it. The 
coloni should be ranked with the unfree class, for, although they 
were personally free, they were attached to the soil. Their 
ranks were recruited by freedmen, by perpetual renters, and by 
smaU proprietors who found it necessary to surrender their 

lands to some nobleman in order to secure protec- 

Pleos. 

tion against violence. The plebs (freemen, small 
proprietors, laborers, artisans, shopkeepers, the population of 
the small towns) tended to lose their freedom, being forbidden 



i8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

to remove or to change their occupation. The class of curiales 
was composed of the well-to-do inhabitants of the country and 
of the cities. All who possessed a certain amount 
of wealth were ranked with this class. The bur- 
den of the government was put on them, and they were 
also made responsible for the payment of the imperial taxes — 
a burden which they tried to escape by sinking into a lower 
class or rising into a higher. Heavy taxation was rapidly ruin- 
itig them. The nobility was composed of the 
former senatorial order, i. e., of those who had ob- 
tained a magistracy or had received the rank of senator from 
the emperor, and of the equestrian order. There were grada- 
tions of rank among them (illustres clarissimi, ■ spectabiles) . 
They were the proprietors of the great estates (latijundia). 
" Senator " had become a mere title, conferred by the emperor. 
Many of those who bore the title had never been in Rome. 
Although subject to a land tax they had several special priv- 
ileges, chiefly in the form of exemptions from the ordinary taxes, 
which were levied on the curiales. 

The emperor needed immense sums of money for the support 
of his army, and the host of clerks employed in the bureaus of 
the government. For such purposes a generous outlay was 
both unavoidable and justifiable. But he squan- 
Taxes.'^^^"^^ dered larger sums on the pompous ceremonial and 
splendor of his court, on the crowd of showy but 
useless functionaries with which he surrounded himself, on the 
immense and frequent largesses of grain and bread to the idle 
and pauperized population of the chief cities, and on the elab- 
orate free games and shows which he provided for their enter- 
tainment. The ordinary income of the emperor was wholly 
inadequate to meet these expenses. Consequently he was 
compelled to levy numerous and heavy taxes. 
and Service!' There were taxes on lands and persons, on manu- 
factures, on inheritances, on sales made by mer- 
chants; tolls were cpllected on the highways and at bridges, 
and duties at the city gates and in the harbors; the people 
could be called on to furnish food and clothing for the army, 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 19 

horses and wagons for the transportation of the emperor and 
his troops, lodgings for imperial officials, and to labor in the 
construction or repairing of roads and bridges. Taxation was, 
in fact, at the discretion of the emperor. Even in times of 
prosperity the people would have found the imperial taxation 
very burdensome, to say the least; they were crushed and 
ruined by it under the existing system of land-tenure and agri- 
culture, and under the extraordinary calamities — the civil wars 
and the invasions of the barbarians — which befell the empire 
in the third and succeeding centuries. 

Against oppressive taxation the tax-ridden population could 
obtain little relief, (i) To be sure, every fifteen years, begin- 
ning with the year 312 A. D., their property was revalued or 

assessed for the purpose of fixing the amount of 
Inaction. their taxation for that period (the so-called indic- 

tion). But the assessors, or fiscal agents, deaf to the 
entreaties of the people and regardless of the true value of the 
property, strove to increase rather than to diminish the valua- 
tion. (2) Tow^ard the middle of the fourth century, in re- 
sponse to the loud and frequent complaints of the people, the 

emperors permitted each province to have a ''de- 

Dejensores. ^ i • i . 

fender" to protect the inhabitants against oppres- 
sive taxation. It was his duty " to act as a father for the people 
of both country and city, to prevent them from being burdened 
with taxes, and to protect them against the arrogance of the 
imperial officials and the shamelessness of judges" (Codex 
Just., I, 55. 4). These "defenders," however, were often power- 
less to help, and the only effective relief was given by the 
emperor himself, w^ho, moved to pity by the distress of his 
subjects, frequently remitted the taxes of a province for a few 
years in order to enable its inhabitants to recover a little of 
their lost prosperity. 

Sensible as Diocletian's scheme of having two emperors and 
two Caesars seemed, it was not long in force. It turned out to 
be neither practicable nor effective, for, after the resignation of 
the two emperors, Diocletian and Maximian, in 305, usurpers 
appeared and dissensions arose between the Augusti and the 



20 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Caesars. Long civil wars ensued, out of which Constantine 
eventually emerged victor and sole emperor. He divided the 
Failure of empire among his three sons, but after the death 
Diocletian's of two of them it was reunited. Succeeding em- 
perors, however, found it necessary to have an as- 
sistant, and so during the last quarter of the century there 
were generally two emperors. At the death of Theodosius 
(395), he named one of his sons, Arcadius, emperor in the east, 
and the other, Honorius, emperor in the west — an arrangement 
which continued in force under their successors till 476. Yet, 
although there were two emperors, the idea of the unity of the 
empire did not suffer in the least. In 476 Odovacer, an ambi- 
tious German, put himself at the head of the German troops, 
of which the army was chiefly composed, and demanded lands 
of the emperor. His demand was refused, whereupon he re- 
sorted to force. He seized the emperor, Romulus Augustulus, 
a mere boy, and killed his father, Orestes, in whose hands the 
actual authority had been. He then deposed the boy emperor, 
and in the name of the senate sent the imperial 
^^ insignia to Zeno, the emperor at Constantinople, 

Residing at and begged him to assume the imperial sway over 
nopie. the whole empire, and to recognize Odovacer as 

governor of the diocese of Italy. Technically the 
change in 476 was merely from two emperors to one, but, as a 
matter of fact, the imperial authority disappeared in the west, 
which was already for the most part occupied by barbarian 
invaders. 

There is no doubt that the empire had for some time been 
decUning in many ways. We are justified in believing that 
there had been an intellectual decline, because after 150 A. D. 
Proofs of ^^ great writers or philosophers appeared. We 
General infer that the spirit of commercial enterprise weak- 

ened, because the important trade of the empire 
with India almost ceased in the third century. In no other 
field is the decline more apparent than in that of art. In both 
the fine and practical arts the products of the fourth century 
after Christ are so far inferior to those of the first that the 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 21 

deterioration can be explained only on the supposition of a 
general decline in the whole people. They had lost the power 
of initiative — that strong, undertaking spirit — that had char- 
acterized the early Romans. 

The empire had been growing steadily weaker in a military 
way, because its free population had been constantly dimin- 
ishing. Those of them who became coloni lost the ability even 
P to defend themselves. They could no longer fight. 

Population It is probable, though not certain, that they had 
actually diminished in numbers. The important 
fact is that their spirit was gone. They were of no value to the 
empire in its wars, whether of offense or defense. It seems 
certain that the free population had been further diminished 
by civil wars and rebellions, and by the marauding incursions 
of the barbarians. Furthermore, a plague in the time of 
AureHan (270-275) was especially mortal, decimating the pop- 
ulation of the empire. The oppressive taxation which was be- 
gun by Diocletian also prevented an increase of the popula- 
tion. Moreover, pagan philosophies and the teachings of the 
church fathers begot an indifference, and even a repugnance, 
to the married state, and after the third century the extraor- 
dinary religious value attaching to cehbacy and the rapid 
growth of monasticism probably caused a further decrease in 
the population. In the absence of all statistics, however, we 
can make no positive statement about the increase or decrease 
of the population. 

Whether or not there had been a loss in population, the em- 
perors resorted to the questionable expedient of importing bar- 
barians. They did this sometimes in order to obtain recruits 
Barbarians ^^^ ^^ army, or to relieve the pressure of the bar- 
are barians on the frontier. By fallacious reasoning 
they persuaded themselves that these barbarians 
would cease to be dangerous to the empire when they were once 
settled in it. After the middle of the third century barbarians 
in ever-increasing numbers were brought in. They were estab- 
lished in various parts of Asia Minor; more than 100,000 were 
settled in Thrace at one time; the valleys of the Po, the Danube, 



22 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and the Rhine were repeopled with them ; and large colonies of 
Franks were placed in central Gaul. Generally the government 
paid these barbarian settlers a tribute in grain, in return for 
which they were expected to protect the country against in- 
vaders. In this way the population of whole provinces had 
become barbarian. By the fifth century not only 
was German, ^as the army composed of barbarians, it was even 
commanded by them. Barbarians, especially Ger- 
mans, were often the trusted counsellors of emperors; some 
had been made senators and consuls, and others had even 
been raised to the highest magistracies. Whatever advantages 
were gained by this wholesale importation of barbarians were 
counterbalanced by the damage they did in their frequent re- 
volts. And it is highly probable that their prosperity within 
the empire exercised a considerable attraction on the barbarians 
beyond the frontier, and so helped cause the great invasions 
which resulted in severing the west from the empire. These 
numerous settlements of barbarians within the empire may be 
regarded as a kind of prelude to the great invasions. * 

In these first five centuries of the empire the city pf Rome 
had lost everything politically except the memory of its great- 
ness. Twice it had been humiliated by falling a prey to bar- 
barian invaders: Alaric and the West Goths sacked 
Dedhies ^^ ^^^ burnt a part of it in 410, and Gaiseric, king 
of the Vandals, put the same indignity upon it in 
455. It was no longer the residence of the emperor; its senate 
and magistrates had only local influence; its popular assembly 
had no authority; the city had lost the right to elect the em- 
peror and to invest him with his office; it did not in any way 
control the conduct or policy of the emperor; and it had no 
influence over the imperial officials or the administration of the 
government. The emperor had long since ceased to live at 
Rome. The imperial residence was first removed to Milan 
that the emperor might be nearer the frontier provinces, which 
required most of his attention. Then, when the barbarian in- 
vasions began in earnest, the emperor removed to Ravenna, 
where, behind its walls and marshes, he hoped to find security. 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 23 

Rome's greatness seemed at an end in 476 when Zeno became 
sole emperor, \Adth his residence at Constantinople. The Per- 
sian wars and the troubles on the frontier, as well as a desire to 
perpetuate his name, had influenced Constantine in choosing 
Byzantium for the site of a new city. Situated on 
Capital. the confines of Europe and Asia it was convenient 

,, to both continents; it commanded the sea for both 

M., 205. ' 

war and commerce; and the configuration of its 
site made it a natural stronghold. History has given abundant 
evidence that Constantine's choice of it was wise. 

Constantinople soon took on a Greek character. The gov- 
ernment, however, continued for some time to use Latin as its 
official language. Theodosius II (408-450) is generally regarded 
as the first Greek emperor. He issued some decrees in Greek, 
and established in Constantinople a university in which the 
professors who instructed in Greek slightly outnumbered those 
who instructed in Latin. From that time Latin dechned. It 
should be remembered, however, that even to the fall of Con- 
stantinople (1453) the empire was still called Roman, and its 
subjects Romans. It is, however, customary to speak of it 
as the Greek, or the Byzantine, empire, to distinguish it from the 
western. 

Peoples Outside the Empire 

Outside the empire there were other peoples who were yet 
to become important factors in the history of Europe, and hence 
deserve a word of introduction. The inhabitants of Gaul, 
^, ^ , Britain, Scotland, and Ireland v/ere called Celts, 

The Celts. 

and all of them spoke Celtic dialects. The Celts of 
Gaul and Britain, however, had been conquered by the Romans, 
and their territory made Roman provinces. The inhabitants 
of Gaul had adopted the civilization of Rome and had made 
considerable progress in it. Southern Gaul especially was the 
seat of a flourishing civilization. On the other hand, the 
Celts of Britain had made much less progress in the acquisition 
of Roman civilization, and those of Scotland and Ireland, being 
unconquered, had not yet felt the influence of Rome, and were 



24 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

still barbarians. They (as well as the Celts of Gaul and Britain 
before their conquest by Rome) were divided into a large num- 
ber of tribes, each independent of the others. It was a peculi- 
arity of all the Celts that their tribal government was an aris- 
tocracy, being in the hands of the nobility. The common people 
had no share in it, and, as Caesar says, in matters of government 
were treated by the nobility as slaves. The Celts were brave, 
dashing warriors, but their ardor was easily quenched by dis- 
aster. As a people they were fond of shrill, martial music, 
and of bright, gay colors; they were peculiarly sensitive to elo- 
quent speech, and their orators and poets had great power over 
them. They were noted for the liveliness rather than for the 
persistency of their feelings and emotions, and Gallic fickleness 
was proverbial.* 

East of the continental Celts were the Germans — a numerous 
people, who occupied a vast territory which extended from the 
Black Sea far up into Norway and Sweden. Like the Celts, 

they were separated into a large number of inde- 
G^r an pendent tribes, each speaking a dialect of its own. 

From some unknown cause, however, they passed 
o., I,' 2. through a unifying process, during which many of the 

small tribes mentioned by Caesar and Tacitus dis- 
appeared, and a few great groups or tribes were formed, chief 
of which were the East Goths, West Goths, Vandals, Alamanni 
(Suevi), Burgundians, Lombards, Bavarians, Franks, Saxons, 
and Angles. The Germanic peoples of Denmark, Norway, and 
Sweden are called Northmen, and among them the unifying 
process did not take place till much later (800-1000). Their 
government was essentially democratic in principle. For, al- 
though they had a nobility, and some tribes even had kings, 
whose opinions and advice were respected, the common free- 
man had a voice in the management of all the affairs of the 

* To-day the people of France, Ireland, Wales, and the highlands of 
Scotland are called Celts. Celtic languages are still spoken in Wales, 
parts of Ireland, the Isle of Man, in the highlands of Scotland, and in 
parts of Brittany. The people of Portugal, Spain, France, Roumania, 
and southern Switzerland speak Romance languages; that is, languages 
derived from the spoken Latin. 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 25 

tribe. Their organization was simple; in each small tribe all 
the freemen met once or twice a year to decide important mat- 
ters concerning the whole tribe. The tribe was divided into 
districts called hmidreds. The name hundred probably meant 
originally a group of one hundred warriors, a primitive division 
of the tribe for war, but in historical times it always means a 
district. The assembly of all the freemen of the hundred w^as 
the hundred-court, the regular court in which their crude and 
primitive justice w^as administered according to tribal law; 
this court met perhaps every month. The smallest division 
was the village, but this was primarily a social and economic 
group — a farming village community — and not a political or 
administrative division. After the amalgamation referred to 
the small tribe became, of course, a district of the new and larger 
tribe, and the former meeting of the freemen of the small tribe 
was replaced by the meeting of all the freemen of the large 
tribe. Thus a new division is created, standing between the 
tribe and the hundred; this is called the Gau, or county, or shire, 
but there is no assembly of the freemen of the Gau, except in 
England, where we find a shire-court. 

From a very early time the Germans practised agriculture. 
At first the whole tribe possessed the land and tilled it in com- 
mon, putting all that w^as produced into a common store, from 
which each family w^as supplied as it had need. In 

Tlircc 

Stages in the next stage of their development the whole tribe 
Owiirship ^^^^^ possessed all the land but parcelled it out to 
each family, which tilled it and kept for its own use 
all that it produced. The tribe redistributed the lands every 
year, so that no family received the same fields to till for two 
years in succession. Slowly this arrangement gave way to 
individual and perpetual possession of the tillable land — the 
third stage — each head of a family receiving enough of the tilla- 
ble land for the support of a family. The quantity of land neces- 
sary for such a purpose the Germans called a Hufe, the English 
a ' hide." It was, of course, variable in size, according to the 
quality of the soil. The meadows, pasture-lands, and woods 
were still held as a common possession of the whole tribe, to be 



26 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

used by all. The men were occupied with fighting, hunting, 
and gambling; they regarded work as ignoble and proper only 
for women and slaves. It was customary for the young men 
to join some chieftain and accompany him in his expeditions. 
They fought for him, and in return he was bound to feed and 
clothe them, supply them with arms, and give them a share of 
the booty taken in war. The relation existing between the 
chieftain and his ^'following" (Gefolge, comitatus) was an honor- 
able one and could be severed only by the consent of both 
parties.* 

East of the Germans were the Slavs, who were also divided 
into tribes, and who were still barbarian. It was a long time 
before these Slavic peoples began to unite to form greater 
groups and to play any important part in the his- 
tory of Europe. Their modern divisions are the 
western Russians, the Lithuanians, Poles, Bohemians, Servians, 
Bulgarians, and the other Slavic peoples occupying a number 
of provinces in the Balkan peninsula. They have always shown 
a fatal inability to work together, to make the individual con- 
cessions that are necessary in the formation of a successful 
government. The individual Slav has been unable to submit 
to the will of the majority. There have been, at different times, 
several promising Slavic states in Europe, but all (except 
Russia) have been absorbed by their neighbors, largely because 
they could not work together harmoniously. The outcome of 
the recent war has given them another chance, and a number 
of Slavics tates have been formed. It remains to be seen, 
however, whether the Slavs have learned the art of submitting 
to the will of the majority. 

Beyond the Slavs were other peoples, such as the Finns, 
Lapps, and Huns, known as Ural-Altaic or Turanian peoples. 

* The following modern peoples are Germanic: the German popula- 
tion of Austria (chiefly in the grand duchy of Austria), of Switzerland, 
and of Germany; the inhabitants of Holland, Denmark, Norway, and 
Sweden; the Flemings of Belgium; and the Anglo-Saxons of Great 
Britain and America. The languages spoken by all these peoples are 
related, being derived from a common stock, and form a group of the 
so-called Indo-European languages. 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 27 

Their migratory habits make their movements and location 
during the early Middle Age uncertain and unim- 
Peopies^.^ portant. To-day they are represented in Europe 
by the Hungarians, Turks, Finns, and Lapps. Up 
to the present they have not made any important contribu- 
tion to the civilization of Europe.* 

The Rising Church 

In contrast to the decaying empire was the new vigorous 
religion, Christianity, that was destined in the course of the 
Middle Age to play a leading role in the affairs of Europe. At 
first despised and persecuted, then tolerated, it was finally 
made the only religion of the state. It built up a far-reaching 
and powerful organization, and in its ideals and ambitions came 
into conflict with the empire. In the long, fierce ensuing strug- 
gle between them the church was victorious. It broke down 
the empire and sought to take its place as ruler of the world, 
and, in its attempt to obtain the universal sway that had been 
the empire's boast, it almost acquired the world-wide domina- 
tion that had been the dream of the greatest emperors. To 
its development in the first centuries we .must now direct our 
attention. 

Under the republic as well as under the empire the state 

* Sanscrit, Persian, Armenian, Greek, Latin, Celtic, German (in- 
cluding English, Dutch, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, and Flemish), 
and Slavic are related, having many words in common and following 
the same general grammatical principles. Because of this relation 
these languages are grouped together and called Indo-European. It 
must not, however, be inferred that the peoples who spoke them were 
on that account necessarily related racially, although they are gener- 
ally spoken of as Indo-European peoples. This classification concerns 
only the languages, not the peoples themselves. The languages spoken 
by Ural-Altaic peoples are called agglutinative, because of the peculiar 
way in which words are joined to express relations and ideas. For 
example, in Hungarian: nev = name; nevem = my name; nevemben = 
in my name; penz = money; penzert = for the sake of money; atya = 
father; atyam = my father; atyamnal = with my father. In Turkish: 
tep = to kick; tepish = to kick one another; tepeme = to be unable to 
kick; tepdir = to cause a person to kick; tepdireme==to be unable to 
cause a person to kick. 



28 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

controlled religion and all religious matters. The state as- 
sumed the right to say what religions its citizens might prac- 
The State ^^^^' what gods they might worship, and in what 
Controlled ways. This was an important principle because it 

governed the relations between church and state 
till far into modern times. The state might punish the Chris- 
tians for various plausible reasons. It based its opposition to 
them on certain matters which we, however, know were not in 
the least criminal or dangerous either to society or to the state, 
(i) Rome had forbidden all eastern or Asiatic religions, ex- 
p , cept Judaism, to be practised in the west. Chris- 

the tianity was therefore a prohibited religion merely 

because it had arisen in Asia; hence, merely to be 
a Christian was a crime. 

(2) Since Christianity was forbidden, its adherents met 
secretly, thus arousing the suspicions of the police, who came 
to regard the church as a secret society which ought to be sup- 
pressed. Under the empire secret societies and all secret meet- 
ings were forbidden, because they gave opportunities to plot 
against the government. 

(3) By refusing to worship the emperor* Christians exposed 
themselves to the charge of treason, or lese-majesty, the pun- 
ishment for which was death. 

(4) Christians could not serve the state because of the idola- 
trous character of many of the duties which rested on every 
state official. Neither could they freely share the social life of 

their pagan neighbors because of the numerous 
Lenient.^^ idolatrous practices and rites which custom and 

etiquette prescribed. In order to shun the guilt of 
idolatry Christians withdrew as much as possible from social 

* The custom of worshipping the emperor as a god was borrowed 
from Parthia. It was practised in the eastern provinces during the 
reign of Augustus, and soon spread throughout the empire. Temples 
were built and altars erected in his honor. So popular did the worship 
of the emperor become, especially in the army, that it threatened to 
supersede all other forms of worship. The author of Revelation speaks 
of this emperor- worship in a veiled way, calling it the "worship of the 
beast and his image" {cf. Rev. 13: n-15; 14: 9-11; 15: 2; 16: 2; 19: 20; 
20:4). 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 29 

as well as from public life. For withdrawing from the service 
of the state they were regarded as rebels, and for withdrawing 
from social life they got the reputation of hating the human 
race. For all these offenses the state might punish. As a mat- 
ter of fact, however, the Roman government was pacific, hav- 
ing learned the wisdom of leniency, and, in order not to embit- 
ter its subjects, took notice of only the most flagrant offenses. 
Except in times of persecution the government did not seek to 
enforce the law against Christians and did not arrest them ex- 
cept under strong provocation. The populace, however, was 
not so forbearing, but punished the refusal of the 
Violent Christians to take part in the worship of the gods, 

to serve the state, and to share the social life of the 
community, by many acts of mob violence. All events of a 
calamitous nature, such as pests, storms, failure of crops, and 
famine, were popularly attributed to the anger of the gods, 
who were offended at the presence of those who refused to 
worship them. Consequently the Christians were constantly 
exposed to the unlicensed attacks of the mob, who greeted them 
with the oft-repeated shout "Ad bestias^' (that is, let the Chris- 
tians be thrown to the wild beasts in the amphitheatre). 
Against such attacks of the mob the Christians could have 
neither protection nor legal redress. The persecution of the 
Christians for their heresy in religious belief and for the eccen- 
tricity of their behavior grew out of the strong sense of corporate 
responsibility which animated the Romans. To their way of 
thinking, society formed such a corporation as must necessarily 
hold itself responsible for the words and acts of all its members. 
They were beset by the anxiety lest an individual offense should 
bring down a corporate punishment on the whole community. 
Christians complained bitterly of the form of the trial to 
which they were subjected when arrested on the 
of Trial. charge of being Christians. It was conducted in 
M 103 ^^^^ ^ ^^y ^^ ^^ discover merely whether the ac- 

cused was a Christian, and not whether he was 
guilty of some real crime, such as theft or murder. No matter 
how upright and honest a man was, if he was proved to be a 



30 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Christian the law punished him as if he were a real malefactor. 
Ordinarily the accused was brought before a statue of the em- 
peror and ordered to burn incense and to pour out a libation 
to it. If he refused to perform these acts he was declared guilty. 
The punishment was death by beheading, or by crucifixion, or 
by being thrown to the wild beasts in the amphitheatre as a 
show for the populace. Sometimes they were condemned to 
penal servitude in the state mines or to exile. 

The first persecutions which the Christians suf- 

The First , . :, i , r a • , 

General fered were either local or confined to a single prov- 

249^^^^ ^°'^' ince. In 249, however, the emperor Decius or- 
j. _ dered a general persecution of the Christians 
throughout the empire, with the purpose of com- 
pletely destroying them. The persecution lasted but a short 
time, and for about fifty years thereafter the Christians were 
not seriously molested. In 303, however, Diocle- 

The 

Diocletian tian, at the instigation of his Caesar, Galerius, who 
303^^^^ ^°^' was a fanatical pagan, issued in rapid succession 
three sweeping edicts against them: all oificials who 
were Christian should resign; all Christians must 
sacrifice to the gods under pain of death; their churches were 
everywhere to be destroyed and their holy books seized and 
burned. For eight years persecution raged, but under its fury 
the number of Christians seemed to increase rather than dimin- 
ish. In 311 Galerius, seeing the futility of the efforts of the 
state to destroy the new religion, issued an edict of 

Christianity , . , 7 , , , ^ 

Legalized, toleration, which was re-enacted by Constantme 
^^^' in 312, and again in 313. In the struggle between 

^•' ^- opposing emperors two parties were formed, one 

reactionary, in favor of paganism and the old gods 
of the state; the other Christian. Constantine, with great 
political foresight, associated himself with the Christian party 
and thereby came out victorious. 

After his victory over his last opponent, the emperor Licinius, 
in 323, Constantine openly espoused the Christian faith, al- 
though he postponed his baptism till shortly before his death 
(337)' The edicts of toleration, however, it should be noted, 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 31 

merely made Christianity a legal religion by putting it on the 
same plane as the worship of all the other gods recognized by 
the state. Constantine made no attempt to diminish or to 
prevent the worship of the pagan divinities, although he re- 
moved their images from his coins (323). He bestowed such 
favors on Christianity as were already enjoyed by other re- 
ligions. He released the Christian clergy from the burden- 
some duty of serving in municipal offices (312); he made valid 
the manumission of slaves which took place in churches; he 
permitted churches to hold property and receive inheritances. 
He himself contributed liberally to the building of churches and 
to the support of the clergy. He caused his children to be 
taught the Christian doctrines. He protected the Christians 
against the persecutions of the Jews. Out of deference to Chris- 
tians he ordered that Sunday be observed by the closing of all 
courts and by the cessation from labor on that day. In fact, 
much of his legislation was permeated with a spirit of humane- 
ness that should undoubtedly be attributed to the influence of 
Christianity upon him.* 

When Constantine made Christianity a legal religion he as- 
sumed the same authority over it as he already exercised over 
all other religions in the empire. He regarded the Christian 
The State clergy as officials of the state. He called the coun- 
Controlsthe cil of Nicaea (325), presided over it, and made its 
decrees valid by ratifying them. Without actually 
dictating what the creed should be, he attempted to prevent 
heresy in the church by compelling the universal acceptance of 
a single creed. 

Constantine had merely made Christianity a legal religion, 

but the emperors Gratian (375-383) and Theodosius 

the^onr'^^^^ (379-395) issued a series of laws for the purpose of 

Legal making the orthodox form of Christianity the reli- 

Religion in . . , , , i i i t • • i 

the Empire, gion 01 the State and the only legal rehgion m the 

empire. They confiscated the temple property 

and withdrew state support from the pagan priests and 

the vestal virgins. They forbade the worship of the pagan 

* See Vita ConstanUni, IV, 26, for his legislation. 



35 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

gods and prohibited all heresies, as the variations from the 
orthodox creed were called. Although these laws were not 
strictly enforced, both pagans and heretics were thereafter in 
danger of persecution. 

Let us now stop a moment and ask: What were the essential 
elements of unity in this great Roman empire? What held 
the peoples in it together? What did they have in common? 
First, they had a common language, for Latin was 
ikments of spoken at least in all the empire west of the Balkan 
Unity. peninsula. Out of that spoken Latin have been 

I. Latin a developed the modern languages of Portugal, Spain, 
Language. France, Italy, Roumania, and some parts of Swit- 
zerland, and because they are derived from the 
language of Rome they are called Romance languages. 

The second element of unity was the Roman law, 
Roman Law. ^^^ principles of which were the same throughout 
the empire, although the laws of one province might 
differ from those of another. 

The third essential element of unity was the imperial admin- 
istration, which was an organized scheme of absolute gov- 
ernment. As the emperors extended their sway all local in- 
dependence had disappeared. A new, imperial 
Imperial nationality had grown up, and the people, even of 
Uon^^'^^^^^^" the remotest provinces, forgot their tribal names and 
called themselves Roman. They regarded them- 
selves as citizens of Rome, just as though the walls of the city 
had been expanded to take in the whole empire. And, to give 
this element greater strength, the people believed that the 
Roman empire was never to end or to be divided. Territory 
that had once become a part of the empire must always remain 
a part of it, even though an enemy might get possession of it. 
In the JEndd Vergil expressed the popular belief in the words 
of Jupiter to Venus: "To the Romans I set no limits either in 
space or time; I have given them dominion without end" 
(Book II, Knes 278-9). 

The fourth essential element of unity was the Christian 
religion, for the minds of the people were dominated by the 



THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO 476 A. D. 33 

idea of one Roman Catholic church, with a uniform creed, from 
which no deviation was to be permitted. It was 

Church. called Catholic because it claimed to be universal, 

and it was called Roman because it had identified 

itself with the Roman empire; Roman and Christian had come, 

in the fifth century, to have the same meaning. 



CHAPTER II 

THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS AND THE 
ESTABLISHMENT OF GERMAN KINGDOMS 
ON ROMAN SOIL 

The protection of the frontier along the Danube and Rhine 
was, even in the second century, one of the hardest tasks of the 
emperor. Its difficulty increased continually, because the bar- 
barians beyond those rivers showed a growing in- 
Invasions. clination to break into the empire. In this they 
seem to have been influenced by hunger, the desire 
for plunder, the pressure of other tribes that were attacking 
them in the rear, and perhaps by the longing to have a share in 
a superior civilization. It should be recalled that large num- 
bers of barbarians had improved their condition by settling 
within the empire, and the Germans outside the empire were 
no doubt desirous of doing the same thing. During the two 
centuries preceding the invasion of the West Goths (160-376) 
these barbarians repeatedly invaded the empire (even Africa 
and Asia Minor were not spared), but withdrew after sacking 
and ravaging its richest provinces. 

The great migrations began in the latter half of the fourth 
century. Whole tribes, taking their meagre belongings with 
them, forcibly entered the empire and compelled the emperor 
to grant them large tracts of land. There they set 
Migrations. ^P ^^^^^ <^wn government under their kings, lived 
according to their own laws, and reduced the pro- 
vincials to subjection. For the Qerman tribes concerned, this 
movement was a migration; for the provincials affected by it 
and for the empire, it was a forcible invasion and occupation of 
various provinces of the empire by barbarians. It is true, how- 
ever, that sooner or later the invaders made terms with the 

34 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 35 

emperor, who, yielding to necessity, assigned certain lands to 
them. This cession of lands was but the continuation of the 
compromise between the empire and the Germans, which for 
two centuries had been steadily growing more serious. The 
emperors were generally unable to make a vigorous resistance 
against them because of the numerous usurpers who arose in 
various parts of the empire during those times. 

In 376 the West Goths, who for more than two centuries had 

occupied an extensive territory north of the lower Danube, 

yielded to the pressure of the East Goths and of the Huns, who 

had attacked them in the rear, crossed the Danube, 

The West . 

Goths. and were settled by the emperor in the lands south 

s. B. 2. ^f that river. In 378 they rebelled, and after dev- 

o., 3, 4. astating the surrounding territory were pacified 

by the emperor only with the greatest difficulty. 
Toward the end of the century they grew restive and deter- 
mined to migrate. Under the leadership of their young and 
ambitious king, Alaric, they set out rather blindly, without any 
definite destination in view. After ravaging a good part of 
the Balkan peninsula they were met in the western Peloponnesus 

by the imperial army under Stilicho, himself a Ger- 
Stilicho.^ man and an able general. Now, at both Rome and 

Constantinople there was a powerful patriotic party 
that was trying to rid the empire of barbarians. Stilicho, al- 
though his daughter was the wife of the emperor Honorius, 
knew that his position was precarious because of the opposition 
of this party. It was plainly not to his interest to destroy the 
West Goths and thus further the policy of his opponents. The 
sources are silent about what took place between Stilicho and 
Alaric, but it has been conjectured that Stilicho wished to make 
his son emperor, and in order to secure the aid of Alaric made 
terms with him. At any rate, Stilicho returned to Italy with- 
out striking a blow, and Alaric proceeded into Ulyricum, ravaging 
the country as he went. There he established his people on the 
boundary between the prefectures of Ulyricum (east of the 
upper Adriatic) and Italy. He then again entered into relations 
with the eastern emperor, from whom he received the title of 



36 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

commander of the troops in Illyricum {magister militum per 
Illyricum). There his stay was short; in 401 he invaded Italy, 
but meeting only with defeat he withdrew his people into 
southern Noricum (corresponding to a part of Bavaria and 
Austria) and northern Illyricum (403). 

Scarcely was Italy free of the West Goths when it was in- 
vaded by an immense army of East Goths under their king, 
Ratiger. To meet them Stilicho made extraordinary efforts to 
rp, increase the number of his troops and called the 

Unprotected distant legions on the Rhine to his aid. He was 

completely successful in battle, destroying the whole 
force of Ratiger (404-405). In 408 the national party caused 
the downfall of Stilicho; the emperor, listening to their charges 
of treason, put him to death. Alaric took advantage of the 
death of Stilicho to demand of the emperor a large sum of 
money, an exchange of hostages, and the cession of Pannonia 
(a part of Austria and Hungary) for his people. On the em- 
peror's refusal he led his people into Italy. They marched 
directly against Rome, which, after fruitless negotiations with 

the emperor, they finally took and sacked (410). 
Sack of They passed the next winter in southern Italy, 

Rome, 410 , . . , . , 

R., II. where Alaric died. Under his successor, Athaulf, 

the West Goths, slowly moving to the north, con- 
tinued their depredations. In 412 they entered Gaul. In 414 
Athaulf tried to assume a more authoritative position by marry- 
ing the emperor's sister, Gallia Placidia, whom Alaric had taken 
prisoner in the sack of Rome. Honorius, however, was offended 
by the marriage of his sister to a barbarian, and refused to be 
conciliated. Athaulf was soon afterward murdered (415), and 
his successor, Walia, surrendered the royal captive to Honorius 
and entered his service. He served the emperor faithfully, and 
The West ^^^ rewarded in 419 by the grant of northeastern 
Goth Spain and southern Gaul. The West Goths were 

Kingdom. . . r i • 1 i • 1 • 1 1 1 

soon m possession of a kingdom which included a 
large part of Spain and southern Gaul as far as the Loire. Dur- 
ing the sixth century, however, they were driven out of Gaul 
by the victorious Franks, but indemnified themselves for this 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 37 

loss by acquiring all of Spain. They began, however, to decline 
in vigor and warlike prowess, and in the eighth century fell an 
easy prey to the Mohammedans (711). 

While Stilicho was destroying the East Goths under Ratiger, 
a usurper who had arisen in Britain was preparing to invade 
Gaul. Stilicho, unable to meet him, resorted to the question- 
able expedient of asking several German tribes 
Vandals. which were along the upper Danube to enter Gaul 
s B 2 (4o6~407)« He expected them to come into con- 

flict with the usurper, and thought that, no matter 
who was victorious, he would later find it easy to overcome the 
victor. In this he was disappointed, for, although the usurper 
gained an advantage over the invading Germans, he did not 
prosecute it, but sought to establish himself in southeastern 
Gaul. The invading Germans, chief of whom were the Suevi 
and Vandals, slowly passed through Gaul to the south, leaving 
desolation and ruin behind them. When the West Goths en- 
tered Gaul they found these Germans there and made war on 
them. The Suevi retreated before the West Goths into north- 
western Spain and took possession of that part of 
the^Suevi ° ^^^ country. There they established a kingdom, 
which, however, was never powerful. The West 
Goths had little difficulty in overcoming them and annexing 
their territory (585). The Vandals withdrew into southern 
Spain, which they held for a few years. They were soon at- 
tracted into Africa, which offered them easy booty because its 
governor was in rebellion against the emperor.^ They were 
successful from the first, and in the course of ten years (429-439) 
took possession of the whole province and estab- 
the^Vandak. lished their kingdom there. Led by their cunning, 
treacherous, and cruel king, Gaiseric, the Vandals, 
because of their ravaging expeditions, were a scourge to the 
civilized world about them. Under his weak successors, how- 
ever, their power declined, and the army of Justinian had little 
difficulty in destroying their kingdom (533-534). 

Early in the fifth century the Burgundians entered the em- 
pire and were given lands in the neighborhood of Worms. 



38 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

About 443 they obtained the permission of the emperor to re- 
^. , , move into the valley of the upper Rhone. There 
the Bur- they flourished, and slowly extended their kingdom 

toward the south until they reached the Mediter- 
ranean. Their promising kingdom, however, was brought to 
an end by the Franks, who conquered them and annexed their 
territory (532). 

The Alamanni were composed of many tribes who had for- 
merly been known as Suevi, or Suabians. At first a loose con- 
federation of tribes, they were united during the fifth century 

under a king. They took possession of some of the 
Al^anni. lands of the empire, and enlarged their territory by 

conquest until their kingdom extended from the 
Main River to the Bernese Alps, and from the Vosges Moun- 
tains to the Lech River (including the modern kingdom of 
Wiirtemberg, the northern part of Switzerland, the Grand 
Duchy of Baden, Alsace, and Rhenish Franken). As they ex- 
tended westward they came into conflict with the Franks, 
who conquered them and made an end of their kingdom by an- 
nexing a part of their territory. 

After the deposition of Romulus Augustulus (476), Odovacer 
called himself king, and was, in fact, king over the combined 
German mercenaries in whose name and with whose aid he had 

acted. He made no use of the imperial insignia, 
Odovacer although he acted as an emperor in taking possession 
Italy. of the imperial domain and of the mines. The em- 

s. B., 2. peror and the people of Italy, however, regarded 

him merely as the governor of the diocese of Italy, 
with the title "patrician." He maintained the Roman admin- 
istrative system as he found it, and the government proceeded 
with no essential change except that in place of an idle, worth- 
less emperor a vigorous, able man was at the head of affairs. 
He established peace, administer<?d the government ably, and 
defended the frontier against attacks of barbarians. Under his 
wise rule Italy began to enjoy an unwonted prosperity. 

The rule of Odovacer was, however, soon cut short by the 
invasion of the East Goths, a powerful tribe which had been 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 39 

troubling the Danube frontier for about a hundred years, al- 
though for a large part of that time they had been tributary to 
S. B., 3. the Huns. After taking possession of southeastern 

The Huns. Europe in the last quarter of the fourth century, the 
Q course of the Huns to the west was temporarily 

R., 14-16. checked. Their domination extended from the 
upper Danube to the Caspian Sea, and their ravages ranged 
from the Rhine to the Euphrates. During the first half of the 
fifth century there arose among them a great leader and con- 
queror, Attila by name. With an army composed of Huns and 
Germans he more than once ravaged the eastern empire. In 
450 he attempted to conquer the West, but, after devastating 
northern Gaul, he was defeated by an army gathered from all 
quarters (451, in the ''Catalaunian fields," the location of which 
is not certainly known) , and compelled to withdraw. After his 
death (453) his great empire fell to pieces. The East Goths, 
having thus become free, entered into relations vdth the eastern 
emperor. Although they became subject to him, they did not 
hesitate to make war on him. Since they were a constant 
menace to the empire, the emperor gladly gave his consent when 
their king, Theodoric, asked for permission to invade Italy and 
wrest it from Odovacer. Two considerations seem to have de- 
termined Theodoric to invade Italy, (i) The East Goths were 
really in w^ant, because the imperial government did not supply 
them with sufficient grain, and the whole territory of the Danube, 
having been devastated through years of constant pillaging and 
warfare, did not produce enough for their sustenance. (2) 
Odovacer had attacked and almost annihilated the Rugians, a 
German tribe that was friendly to the East Goths, and their 
king, after his defeat, had fled to Theodoric and begged him to 
avenge the injury. In 488 the East Goths, accompanied b}- 
Kingdom of ^^ remnant of the Rugians, set out for Italy, which 
the East they reached the next year. After four years of 
fighting, Odovacer and Theodoric agreed to rule 
■' ^' the country together. Theodoric, however, hav- 

ing discovered, as it was said, that Odovacer was plotting 
against him, soon put him to death and became sole ruler. 



40 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The kingdom of the East Goths included the whole diocese of 
Italy. Although nominally subject to the emperor, Theodoric 
took possession of the imperial domain and of the mines and 
ruled as an independent king. 

Theodoric gave Italy a remarkable rule. Perhaps the coun- 
try had never before experienced so just, unerring, and impar- 
tial an administration of justice as his was. Through his effi- 
cient police protection life and property everywhere 
the Great. ^^ ^^^ realm enjoyed a security which had long been 
unknown. Throughout Italy he restored the aque- 
ducts, most of which were in a dilapidated condition, thus giv- 
ing the cities an adequate supply of pure water. He provided 
for the defense of the cities by rebuilding their walls or raising 
new ones. He exhibited a keen appreciation of Roman civiliza- 
tion by preserving and restoring temples, monuments, and works 
of art, and he added to the beauty of many of the cities by 
erecting new palaces and baths. He repaired the roads, and 
by draining marshes recovered a large tract of land for culti- 
vation. Under his reign agriculture so flourished that Italy, 
which for centuries had been compelled to import grain, was 
able to export it. He showed a statesmanlike sense and in- 
sight by preserving unchanged the imperial system of admin- 
istering the government. He reopened the gold mines in Ca- 
labria and the iron mines in Dalmatia, encouraged commerce, 
and fostered industries and manufactures throughout his 
kingdom. 

In his relations with the other German kingdoms which had 
been estabHshed within the empire Theodoric showed a remark- 
ably clear political vision. Foreseeing that their continued 
existence depended on their union, he sought to 
the Germans, ^ind them all together and to prevent them from 
destroying one another. By intermarriages he 
made alliances with most of their royal families: he gave his 
sister in marriage to the king of the Vandals, one of his daugh- 
ters to the king of the Burgundians, another to the king of the 
West Goths, and a niece to the king of the Thuringians; he 
himself married a sister of Chlodovech, the king of the Franks. 



Note to Map III. — After the end of the line of emperors in the year 476, 
the whole empire was supposed to be united under one ruler, the emperor 
at Constantinople. In fact, his authority was limited to the Balkan penin- 
sula and the eastern Mediterranean lands (Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt). 
Virtually all of the western empire was occupied by Gerrhanic tribal kings 
established by the invasions. In some cases (West Goths, East Goths, Van- 
dals) these tribes had been invited in by Roman officials or given permis- 
sion to settle, under the name of "allies"; in fact, however, the German 
kings ruled over these lands and the people (both Roman and German) 
and the Roman emperor had no authority over them. Note how the Slavs 
had advanced westward as far as the Elbe River, occupying lands left vacant 
by the migrating German tribes (compare Map II). 



10 



^ 



O 



^^ 



o ^" 



S 



nU' 



iBRlTTA 



sH 



Rheii 



-C^ 



.vy, 



^^^ 



lo^^ 



oOrle'ans 



Loire 



Mail 



A L A 1 

(till 



i5 



40 




\ 



BUR/ 



|0 dvpoldeat 



DNDIANS ' 
f 43-534) 
-.J' on \_ 



C AN 



jt: 



_To/et 



"Hi / 



Co, 



'•<ioba 



<?>. 



♦' 



^ '- 



<<. 



Narbonne > 



^^' 



b\^ 



3^ 









<^ 



COILS 
(Kant 



SARDIN 



(Va7idal 



}^ 



e: 



D IT 



E 



35 



A N I D A 
(429-534) 



L.L.POAT^S CO , N 



LoDfritude 



NVest 



Longitude 



East 



After 507 the Kint'doin of the West Goths 




from 



lited to a small southern strip (Septimania). 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 41 

He granted religious liberty in the most enlightened way, de- 
claring that there ought to be no compulsion in matters of faith, 
and that the individual was accountable for his belief and con- 
science to God alone. The last years of his reign 
FreS^om. ^vere embittered by the ingratitude and treasonable 
conduct of some of his trusted friends and officials, 
among whom were the famous Boethius, the author of The Con- 
solations of Philosophy, and Symmachus. Enraged at their 
unfaithfulness, he lost perhaps some of his fine self-control and 
his calm judgment and put them to death, thereby exposing 
himself to the charge of injustice and persecution. In spite of 
this, the character of his long reign justly entitled him to the 
surname Great. At his death (525) only a daughter was left 
to succeed him, and his kingdom began to go to pieces. In 
534 the emperor Justinian attacked the East Goths, and, after 
a war which, with interruptions, lasted for nearly twenty years, 
conquered them, and Italy, ruined by this wretched war, was 
again reduced nominally to the rank of a province of the 
empire (553). 

There were several German tribes still outside the empire, 
and a word about them is necessary. Beyond the Danube 
were the Lombards and the Gepidae, of which the latter were to 
Q , be completely destroyed in the sixth century. In 

German the coursc of the fifth century fragments of several 

tribes (Quadi, Marcomanni, Rugii, etc.), who were 
located in Bohemia, united to form a new tribe. From the 
country they came to be called Bavarians (men of Bohemia). 
Early in the sixth century they migrated and settled in Noricum, 
which was soon called Bavaria. Between the Bavarians and 
the Alamanni were the Suevi. The Franks, who were com- 
posed of many tribes, each under its own king, occupied both 
banks of the lower Rhine, and were gradually spreading over 
northern Gaul. As yet they had given little indication of the 
great role which they were to play in the history of Europe. 
To the northeast of the Franks w^ere the Saxons, who extended 
to the Elbe. East of the Franks and south of the Saxons were 
the Thuringians, the descendants of the ancient Hermunduri. 



42 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Their name is perpetuated in that of the Thuringian Forest. 
Angles, Jutes, and Danes occupied what is now known as Den- 
mark, and the inhabitants of Norway and Sweden, consisting 
of many tribes, were called Northmen. About the middle of 
the fifth century various bands of Angles, Saxons, and Jutes 
migrated to Britain, where they established several 
little kingdoms, out of which the kingdom of Eng- 
land was to be evolved. 

When the Germans moved into the empire they left vacant 
a large territory which was soon occupied by Slavs. Follow- 
ing close on the heels of the withdrawing Germans the Slavs 
took possession of the territory north of the lower Danube, of 
the region called Bohemia, and of all the land east of the Elbe 
(what is now Prussia). One of the most interesting and im- 
portant chapters of German history in the Middle Age deals 
with the reconquest of this territory and the expansion of Ger- 
many to the east. 

An important feature of the invasion was the seizure of land 
by the Germans. Indeed, their first demand was that farming 
land be given them. The fact that these Germans were in- 
The Invaders vaders was cloaked under the name of allies {J(e- 
TakeaPart derati). As allies they had a right to a share of 

of the Land. -' '^ 

the land. Until the division could be made they 
■' ^" quartered themselves on the provincials. Because 

of the scant information w^hich the sources give us, the exact 
manner in which they dispossessed the provincials cannot be 
determined. It is certain, however, that the division was not 
made once for all, but that, as the Germans had need, they 
spread over new provinces, in each one demanding land. The 
divisions varied also from province to province. Of the Bur- 
gundians we know that they generally received half of every- 
thing, the houses and buildings, gardens, orchards, ploughlands, 
meadows, woodlands, and serfs (coloni), although in some 
provinces they took two-thirds of the ploughlands and one- 
third of the serfs. The king took all the lands which belonged 
to the emperor (crown lands), and may have seized others also. 
The rank of an individual determined the amount of land he 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 43 

received: the small proprietors were compelled to share their 
land with the freemen, while the great landlords divided their 
^ , J _ estates with the nobles. In this way the nobles 

Become Rich acquired a solid advantage over the common free- 
men. The Germans under Odovacer took only 
one-third of the land. They were already quartered on the in- 
habitants. That is, they occupied one-third of the house of 
the man on whom they had been quartered. This seems to 
have determined their request for one- third of the land. The 
East Goths took the lands which Odovacer had given his people, 
and probably also some of the w^aste lands. The West Goths 
generally took two- thirds of the ploughlands and one-half of 
the woods. /The Vandals were conquerors in Africa, and hence 
were never quartered on the inhabitants, as all the other Ger- 
mans were. They actually took all the land about Carthage, 
dispossessing all the provincials. These they either killed, or 
expelled, or reduced to slavery, compelling them to till the soil 
for their new masters. Two whole provinces Gaiseric took for 
himself, and others he divided among his ''followers" {Gefolge). 
Although it was a hardship to many of the provincials to be 
deprived of half of their possessions, yet the general effect of 
the division was probably good. For, as the formation of great 
estates caused in part the decline in agriculture and the increase 
in poverty, so the division of them had, in reaUty, a beneficial 
effect. 

Since the Germans were invaders there could, of course, be 
no friendly relations between them and the people among 
whom they settled. There were also other causes operating to 
increase their mutual ill-will. The provincials 
between looked down on the Germans as barbarians, and the 

Germans^^^ Germans despised the provincials for their cowardice 
and their inability to defend themselves. The re- 
sentment of the provincials was further increased by the fact 
that the Germans seized so much of their land. Furthermore, 
the two peoples, though living side by side, were separated by 
their radically different legal conceptions and methods of legal 
procedure. In the early days of Rome Roman law was re- 



44 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

garded as a personal possession, the possessor of which carried 
it with him wherever he went. But after the edict of Cara- 
calla (212) conferring citizenship on all the free inhabitants of 
the empire, law had come to be regarded as territorial rather 
than personal. With the Germans law was still a private pos- 
T, , session. A German was born into the rights which 

Personal ° 

Law of the his father possessed, and these he took with him in 
all his wanderings; he demanded that he be tried, 
not according to the laws of the country in which he was, but 
according to his own tribal law. In their methods of legal 
procedure the differences were great. While the Roman left 
everything to the state and its officials, and the whole procedure 
was conducted in court, the German did everything himself 
out of court, and left to the court nothing except the rendering 
of the decision. The objection, common among uncivilized 
peoples, to the state's interference with the private affairs of 
the individual, operated among the Germans to restrict the 
function of the court to the simple decision of the case. The 
man who won his case put the decision into effect privately, 
without any further aid of the state. The Roman proved his 
guilt or innocence by means of the testimony of witnesses; the 
German did not seek the aid of witnesses, but relied on a cer- 
tain number of his friends as compurgators to swear that they 
believed that he was telling the truth. In certain cases the 
trial took the form of an ordeal, or appeal to divine 
judgment. With the spread of Christianity among 
s. B., 234- ^^ Germans the clergy conducted these ordeals 
and invented others, surrounding them all with 
impressive religious ceremonies which were meant to inspire 
awe in the minds of those making use of them, and to insure 
their value as proofs of the guilt or innocence of those under- 
going them. 

At the time of the invasions the laws of the Germans were 
still unwritten, the knowledge of them being kept alive by oral 
tradition. It was inevitable that their laws and legal forms 
should be affected by the legal customs of the people among 
whom they settled. When they observed that changes and un- 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 45 

certainty were stealing into their legal practices and principles, 
they attempted to fix and preserve their ancient laws by re- 
Laws of the ducing them to writing. The codes thus produced 
Germans. aj-^ called the "laws of the barbarians" {''Leges 
s. B., 4, 7:29. Barbarorum'^), and are an important source of our 

O 7 

■' ' knowledge of the conditions that prevailed among 

the Germans. Of the Prankish laws there are two important 
collections, the lex Salica and the lex Ripuariorum ; the code of 
the West Goths is called the lex Wisigothorum, that of the Bur- 
gundians the lex Burgundionum, and that of the Saxons the lex 
Saxonum. That the Germans on the continent were yielding 
to the influence of the empire is shown by the fact that all 
these codes were written in Latin. On the other hand, the 
Anglo-Saxons, who were in Britain, remaining for some cen- 
turies essentially unaffected by Roman influence, reduced their 
laws to writing in their mother tongue. In spite of their written 
codes, the laws of the Germans on the continent were increas- 
ingly influenced by Roman law, and their actual methods of 
legal procedure represented a fusion of Roman and German 
forms. 

There was between the two peoples also a religious differ- 
ence which, so long as it continued, made their fusion impos- 
sible. With the exception of the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and 
Franks, all the Germans were already Christian 
when they entered the empire. Unfortunately for 
them, they had accepted the Arian creed, which was soon after- 
ward displaced in the empire by the Athanasian. The differ- 
ence between the two creeds concerned the deity of Jesus. 
Arius, a priest of Alexandria, declared that, although Jesus 
was far above man, and was indeed the creator of the world, 
he was nevertheless himself a created being, and therefore 
not truly God in the same sense that God the Father was 
God. His great opponent, Athanasius, was also 
a member of the church at Alexandria, m which 
he had the rank of archdeacon. He taught that Jesus was 
himself God, not created but of the same substance as the 
Father, and that in him God was incarnate. While the creed 



46 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of Arius might be called unitarian, that of Athanasius was trini- 
tarian, and because of its ultimate acceptance by the church 
it is generally called the orthodox creed. It was not, however, 
immediately accepted. The struggle between the two creeds 
passed through several phases and lasted for some three 
centuries. 

Now, missionary work among the Germans was begun while 
the Arian creed was in the ascendancy, and by those who were 
Arian in their belief. The Goths first learned of Christianity 

from Christian prisoners whom they had captured 

in their raids into the empire. Ulfilas, however, 
who devoted himself to the work of converting them, has won 
the title of "apostle of the Goths." He was a descendant of a 
Christian whom the Goths had carried away as a prisoner from 
Asia Minor. Although the chronology of his life cannot be 
fixed, it is certain that he labored to convert the West Goths, 
and that soon after 340 he was made a bishop over them. His 
zeal and success brought upon him the persecution of a deter- 
mined pagan party among the Goths, and he and his followers 
were compelled to flee. About 348 they withdrew into the em- 
pire, and the emperor gave them lands on the northern slope 
of the Haemus Mountains, in Moesia (now the Balkans in Bul- 
garia). Some time after 370 Ulfilas translated nearly all the 

Bible into Gothic, for that purpose inventing a 
TheGothic Qothic alphabet.* He died about 381. Not all 

the Christian Goths went into exile in 348, and 
from those who were left Christianity continued to spread. 

In the course of the fourth century nearly all the German 
tribes accepted the Arian form of Christianity. When they 
settled in the empire they had their own ecclesiastical organiza- 
tion, their own churches, and their own clergy. Generally they 
did not seriously persecute the orthodox provincials, although 
the Vandals were an exception to this rule. Gradually, however, 
through the efforts of the orthodox clergy, all these Germans 
were converted from Arianism to the orthodox faith, and there- 

* A part of this translation is still extant, and is the oldest example 
of ancient German, of which there were many dialects. 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 47 

after intermarriages between them and the provincials were 
more numerous and the fusion of the two races was accelerated. 

All these German kingdoms were estabhshed within the em- 
pire half by force and half with the consent of the imperial 
government. Making a virtue out of necessity, the emperor 
conferred upon them (except the Vandals, who were, 
Has No' and remained, hostile to the emperor) the title of 

the*^West^*^ allies (/(Bderati) , sanctioned their occupation of the 
provinces of the empire, and made the empty stip- 
ulation that they should defend the frontier against further in- 
vasions. Technically, therefore, all these kingdoms (except 
that of the Vandals) and their kings w^ere subject to the em- 
peror. Practically, how^ever, these kings governed their king- 
doms independently and without any regard to him. Although 
they were pleased wdth titles and other empty honors and forms 
of recognition which the emperor occasionally bestowed upon 
them, they were really kings in their ow^n right, and in no way 
answerable to him. The effect of the invasions was, therefore, 
the virtual loss of all the western provinces of the empire, for 
the emperor was never again able to make his authority felt 
throughout the west. It must be remembered, however, that 
the people in the west still thought of themselves as subjects 
of the emperor, and of their land as a part of the empire, for, 
to their way of thinking, the empire was both indivisible and 
indestructible. 

Although the Germans established their kingdoms only in 
the western provinces of the empire, it must not be supposed 
that they did not threaten the east also. Tow^ard the end of 
^ . the fourth century their influence in Constantinople 

Germans in -^ ^ 

Constant!- itself w^as SO great that it seemed they might be 
able to germanize the whole government. The 
army was composed chiefly of German mercenaries, and there 
was a large colony of Germans in Constantinople itself. The 
emperor Arcadius was married to the daughter of a Frank, 
Bauto by name, who had been the commander of the army in 
the east {magister militum per orientem). At the death of Bauto 
he was succeeded by Gainas, a Goth. The conduct of Gainas 



48 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

brought about a situation in Constantinople similar to that in 
Rome in 476, and which might easily have been as disastrous 
to the imperial government there as it was to that at Rome. 
The national or patriotic party, mention of which has already 
been made, was composed of senators and officials who resented 
the intrusion of barbarians into high and important offices, 
and the consequent barbarizing of the government as well as 
of the empire. Religious hatred added bitterness to the strug- 
gle, because the Germans were Arians and the Greeks orthodox. 
This anti-German party demanded that the barbarians be put 
under certain heavy disabilities, with the purpose of eventually 
driving them out of the empire. 

Gainas, the leader of the Germans, was conscious of the 
gravity of the situation, and perceived that it was a struggle 
for existence. In 399 the Germans whom Theodosius had 
settled in Phrygia (in 386) revolted, and Gainas 
treacherously aided them in the hope of being able 
to frighten Arcadius into making concessions to him. In this 
he was successful; at his demand the emperor not only con- 
firmed him in his position as commander of the army but also 
put to death one of his most powerful personal enemies. Em- 
boldened by this success, Gainas demanded that the Arians be 
relieved of all the disabilities that had been placed upon them, 
and that they be permitted to worship freely. The patriarch 
and the emperor, however, stubbornly refused to grant his de- 
mands. His failure to obtain these concessions marks the de- 
cline of his power, and his position in Constantinople became 
more and more precarious. In the desperate hope of recover- 
ing his power he attempted to seize the imperial palace and to 
loot the imperial treasury. Failing in both these undertakings, 
he fled from the city with a part of his troops. An infuriated 
mob put to death all the Germans whom it could find in the 
city. Gainas ravaged Thrace without being able to take a 
single stronghold where he could intrench himself and prolong 
the struggle. He then determined to enter Asia Minor, but 
while crossing the Hellespont his troops were destroyed by the 
imperial army, also under a Goth, named Fravitta. Gainas fled 



THE INVASIONS OF THE GERMANS 49 

beyond the Danube, where he was captured by the king of the 
Huns, who cut off his head and sent it as a present to Arcadius. 
With the downfall of Gainas the power of the German party 
in Constantinople was permanently weakened, and, although 
occasionally an able German leader appeared, none was ever 
again dangerously near overthrowing the government. Leo I 
(457-474) put an effective check on the Germans by enrolling 
other barbarians, the Isaurians, in the army. The cure, how- 
ever, was as bad as the disease, for the Isaurians were quite as 
barbarous, turbulent, and ambitious as the Germans. They 
soon acquired a controlling influence over affairs, and even 
furnished several emperors. They repeated the rebellions of 
the Germans, and their power was broken only after a long 
war by deporting them to Thrace. 



CHAPTER III 

JUSTINIAN AND THE REACTION AGAINST THE 

GERMANS 

In the fifth century the emperors were powerless before the 
invading barbarians, who, as we have seen, forcibly occupied 
nearly all the western part of the empire. Weak and helpless, 
these emperors gave a grudging and forced recog- 
Revives.^^'^^ nition to the governments which the German tribes 
established, but it was never forgotten that they 
were invaders and unwelcome guests. A series of able emperors 
so revived the empire in the sixth century that one of them, 
Justinian (527-565), was able to dream of driving out the hated 
Germans and of restoring the empire to its original boundaries. 
Under Zeno (474-491), Anastasius I (491-518), and Justin I 
(518-527), the empire was wisely administered, the treasury 
replenished, the army made more effective, and thus a good 
foundation was laid for the many-sided activity of Justinian.* 

Justinian (527-565) learned statecraft under his uncle, 
Justin I, who, being illiterate and deficient in knowledge of the 
practical workings of the government, depended on him to 
conduct the affairs of state. Justinian had an amaz- 
527-565!^' i'^g capacity for mastering details and was an effec- 
tive administrator. During his long service under 
his uncle he obtained a thorough knowledge of the machinery 
of government. When he came to the throne he had a well- 
defined ambition to rule in a grand manner — to be absolute in 
every way. He had already matured plans for various courses 
of action which would require the expenditure of large sums of 
money. He found in John of Cappadocia, the pretorian pre- 
fect, a successful and unscrupulous tax-collector, who kept him 
supplied with the money necessary to carry out his great plans. 

* CJ. J. B. Bury, The Later Roman Empire, 2 vols. 

50 



JUSTINIAN 51 

John not only collected with rigorous exactitude the old accus- 
tomed taxes, which were already heavy, but also invented new 
ones, by means of which he extorted immense sums from the 
people. He sold justice in so shameless a manner "that men 
would not go into court and the business of advocates declined." 
The population of Constantinople, as well as that of the other 
large cities of the empire, was divided into two political parties, 
known as the ''greens" and the "blues." These names, orig- 
"G e ns" inally connected with the circus at Rome (their ex- 
and ^^ act origin and character are unknown), had ex- 
tended to all parts of the empire and had come to 
stand for different policies, for different theological doctrines, 
and for different candidates for the imperial throne. The blues 
supported Justinian, and in return for their support demanded 
immunity from the laws. They not only prevented the pun- 
ishment of criminals who were of their party, but maltreated 
their opponents, the greens, who were without redress for all 
the indignities and wrongs done them. The blues became so 
domineering and turbulent that Justinian finally (532) deter- 
mined to break their power and to make himself independent 
of them. In the circus the greens complained to the emperor 
that they were oppressed without redress, and the blues, re- 
senting the charges, attacked them in the street. After some 
bloodshed seven offenders — some of whom were greens and 
some blues — were seized and condemned to death. Five of 
them were executed, but the remaining two were rescued and 
carried to a place of safety. The blues and greens, seeing that 
the emperor threatened the existence of both parties, united to 
resist him. They set fire to the city in several places and blood 
was freely shed in the streets. The numerous adherents of the 
family of Anastasius cleverly fomented the dissatisfaction, and 
finally succeeded in having Hypatius, the nephew of Anastasius, 
crowned emperor. At this Justinian, who was supported by 
only a small body of troops, was advised by his counsellors to 
flee. But Theodora, his wife, overruled them by declaring that 
death was preferable to flight, and that she would rather die 
an empress than live in exile. Justinian determined to fight, 



52 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and sent out Belisarius at the head of his troops to attack the 
mob gathered in the circus to greet Hypatius. Taken at a 
disadvantage, the mob could neither resist nor escape, and the 
troops slaughtered about 35,000 of them. The factions, over- 
whelmed by this disaster, were for years rendered powerless to 
hamper the emperor, who was now left free to devote himself 
to the larger undertakings on which he had set his heart. 

Justinian, fired with the ambition to destroy the Germans 

who had settled in the west and to restore the empire to its 

former boundaries, waited only for an opportunity to attack 

them. Such an opportunity came in <7,i, when 

Justinian's ... . i tt i i i i ^ ^ 

Anti-German the kmg 01 the Vandals was dethroned by a usurper 
° ^^' and cast into prison. Justinian seized this as a 

Destroys the pretext, and in 533 sent a large army under Beli- 
sarius to attack the Vandals. Belisarius was suc- 
cessful and before the end of the year was in possession of their 
kingdom, which was again made a province of the empire. 
Italy next claimed his attention. 

Amalasuntha, queen of the East Goths, when her only son 
died, married her cousin, Theodahad, who soon imprisoned and 
then basely murdered her (535). Her murder served Justinian 
as a pretext for invading the kingdom of the East 
Goths.^^^ Goths. In 535 Belisarius was sent with an army 
into Italy. He landed first in Sicily, and the whole 
island submitted to him. During the next five years he over- 
ran Italy and got possession of all of it except a small part of 
the valley of the Po. In their extremity the East Goths sent 
ambassadors to the king of Persia and persuaded him to attack 
the empire on the east. Justinian was therefore compelled to 
recall Belisarius when the work of conquest was all but com- 
pleted (540). Belisarius left a few troops in Italy to complete 
its subjugation, but made the mistake of dividing the command 
among several generals instead of putting the authority in the 
hands of one of them ; the soldiers were dissatisfied because they 
were not properly paid, and consequently, after the departure of 
Belisarius, the campaign was conducted in a negligent manner. 

The country had been terribly harried during the five years 



JUSTINIAN 53 

of war, and the people were in distress. Nevertheless Justin- 
ian's tax-collectors did not spare them, but assessed them so 
heavily as to cause the Italians to regret the easy rule of the 
East Goths, who had never burdened them with taxes. At the 
same time the East Goths elected an able man king and re- 
newed the w^ar. Success attended them, and by 544 they had 
retaken nearly all of Italy. In that year Belisarius returned 
to Italy, but, as he was not supplied with efficient troops, he 
was unable to repeat his successes of the first years of the war 
and so w^as recalled (548). The war was carried on in a desul- 
tory manner till 551, w^hen Justinian sent Narses with a large 
force to Italy to complete, if possible, its conquest. He prose- 
cuted the war with great vigor, and in 553 he destroyed the East 
Gothic army and put an end to all effective resistance on their 
part, although a few towns were not immediately taken (Verona 
and Brescia did not surrender till 562). Scarcely had Narses 
defeated the East Goths when a Frankish army appeared in 
Lombardy to dispute its possession with him, but he repulsed 
them with great loss. Italy, including Istria and Illyria (a 
large territory north and east of the Adriatic) was again made a 
province of the empire and put under an exarch, a kind of 
governor who exercised authority over all matters, civil, fiscal, 
and military. This exarch took up his residence at Ravenna. 

Justinian next attempted to recover Spain. The West 
Goths under rival kings were divided by civil war. One of the 
factions asked aid of the imperial governor of Africa, who took 
advantage of the situation to conquer a good part 
of the southeastern coast of Spain (Cordova, Car- 
thagena, Malaga) for the emperor. But again Justinian's tax- 
collectors undid the work of his armies, and so oppressed the 
people with taxes that they welcomed the West Goths, w^ho 
gradually reconquered the lost territory. In 623 the last Greek 
troops were driven out and Spain was then wholly in the hands 
of the West Goths. 

Justinian had now reconquered northern Africa, Italy, and 
southeastern Spain, but with these successes he was com- 
pelled to be content. He was not able to prosecute further his 



54 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ambitious plan of recovering all the western provinces which 
were then in the possession of the Germans, because he was fre- 
quently called on to resist some enemy in the east. 
Wars.^'^^^^" It cannot be denied that Justinian courted trouble 
in many quarters, because, having a consuming 
ambition to enlarge the boundaries of his empire, he not 
only offended Persia by intriguing with the small independent 
states which lay on the frontier of the two empires but even 
carried on long and exhausting wars with that country for the 
possession of worthless tracts, merely because of his unreason- 
ing pride in the size of his empire. Immediately after his ac- 
cession to the throne he challenged Persia by beginning to erect 
a great fortress on the Persian frontier near Nisibis. The Per- 
sians accepted the challenge, and a war ensued, which was ended 
in 532 to the advantage of Persia, for Justinian agreed to pay 
a large sum of money, cede certain places, and remove his 
eastern military headquarters farther from the Persian fron- 
tier. Two other wars (540-545 and 549-556) followed, and 
both ended disastrously for Justinian. They interest us here 
only because they kept him from pursuing his policy of destroy- 
ing the Germans and of recovering the west from them. 

It has already been said that as the German tribes moved 
into the empire Slavs followed at their heels and took posses- 
sion of the lands which they vacated. In this way various 
Slavic tribes had reached the frontier of the empire, 
the^Empire.^ and were now devastating the outlying provinces, 
much as the Germans before them had done. As 
early as 300, Slavs, singly or in small groups, began to pass 
quietly across the Danube and settle in the empire, so that by 
500 there was a considerable Slavic population in the Balkan 
peninsula. Those who still lived beyond the Danube gave 
Justinian a great deal of trouble by their invasions. Year after 
year, in company with Bulgarians, a Tatar people, they crossed 
the Danube and ravaged the empire. In 540 they even reached 
the Isthmus of Corinth, but, being prevented from entering the 
Peloponnesus, they crossed to Asia Minor, which they devas- 
tated, and returned to their homes, laden with spoil. 



JUSTINIAN 55 

About 558 the Avars, probably akin to the Huns of Attila, 
made their appearance on the Danube. They had been sub- 
ject to the Turks in Asia, but, rebelHng against them, had moved 
. . westward into Europe. They demanded and re- 

The Avars. . , ., . t. . . , . 

ceived tribute from Justmian, and m 562 mvaded 
and harried Thrace. Although they caused Justinian some 
trouble, they expended most of their warlike energy in fighting 
the Slavs. 

Toward the end of his reign the Cotrigur Huns and the Ut- 

rigur Huns, who occupied the territory north of the Black Sea, 

troubled the empire, but Justinian, unable to chastise them, 

cleverly set them each against the other. He fol- 

TheHuns. , ^^ ^ i- . 1 1 t , , 

lowed the same policy with the Lombards and 
Gepidae, two formidable German tribes on the middle Danube. 
In the end this policy was only partially successful; the Gepidae 
were destroyed by the combined forces of the Lombards and 
Avars; but the Lombards then invaded Italy, while the Avars 
took possession of the lands which had been occupied by both 
the Lombards and Gepidae, and at intervals continued their 
depredations in the empire. 

Not only was Justinian prevented by his Persian wars and 
his struggles with these barbarian invaders from prosecuting 
his plan to recover all the empire, but even his success in re- 
covering a part of Spain was to be undone, for the West Goths 
gradually reconquered all that they had lost. At the same time 
the Germanic element in the empire was strongly reinforced 
by the rapid development of the Franks. By conquering all 
of Gaul, Burgundy, and Batavia they became so powerful that 
no Greek emperor could ever hope to recover those lands. The 
Germans were then so firmly intrenched in the empire that the 
anti-German policy of Justinian could never be carried out. 
Moreover, this policy was soon abandoned because the devel- 
opment of affairs in the Greek empire was such that his suc- 
cessors were compelled to expend all their energies nearer home; 
succeeding emperors were so occupied in the east that they 
could never again effectively interfere in the affairs of the west 
— not even in Italy and those provinces which were nearest at 



56 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

hand. No emperor arose possessing the vaulting ambition of 
Justinian and no conquering general with the military skill of 
Belisarius. The territorial development of the Franks made 
permanent the loss of the west to the Greek emperor, and ren- 
dered futile any hope of reuniting east and west. 

Justinian's reign was characterized by great activity in build- 
ing, in which he spent vast sums of money. The constant in- 
vasions of the barbarians compelled him to restore the existing 
fortresses, and to build new ones, to fortify many 
Builder!^ ^^ cities with walls and towers, and even to found 
new cities in strategic positions. The burning of 
much of Constantinople in the sedition of 532 gave him the op- 
portunity to rebuild many of its churches with great magnifi- 
cence. His building operations were not confined to Constan- 
tinople; his interest in the church as well as in architecture 
led him to promote the erection of fine churches in all parts of 
his empire. In this he was aided by the most able Greek archi- 
tect of the Middle Age, Anthemius of Tralles, immortal as the 
creator of the church of St. Sophia, now the chief mosque of 
Constantinople. This church had a wide influence on archi- 
tecture throughout the empire, since, for several centuries, it 
served as a model which was copied with greater or less exact- 
ness by the architects Of all the provincial cities. The style 
of architecture then in vogue in Constantinople is called By- 
zantine, and is characterized chiefly by the cupola, 
^yzantine ^^ ^j^^ round arch, and by a lavish use of mosaics 
for decorative purposes. Byzantine art reached 
its highest development and originality in the age of Justinian, 
after which it became stereotyped and formal. 

Justinian's interest in the church manifested itself in vari- 
ous ways. Heathenism had still many adherents, especially 
among the philosophers and peasants — the extremes of learn- 
ing and ignorance. Justinian was eager to destroy 
the Church'^ heathenism and heresy and to establish a uniform 
faith. He forbade the further teaching of heathen 
philosophy and closed the University of Athens because its 
teachers were heathen. He directed the labors of what may 
be called home missionaries in various parts of the empire, 



JUSTINIAN 57 

especially among the peasants and mountaineers of Asia Minor. 
He displayed not less zeal for the conversion of the heathen 
peoples on his frontiers, to whom he sent missionaries to in- 
struct them in the Christian faith. He assumed absolute au- 
thority over the church, confirming the election of bishops and 
controlling the formulation of the creed. In 555 he confirmed 
the election of Pelagius, bishop of Rome, whose predecessor, 
Vigilius, he had for some years held a prisoner in Constanti- 
nople because he opposed certain ecclesiastical measures of the 
emperor. After the Nicene Council (325) had declared for the 
complete deity of Jesus, it took more than 300 years to estab- 
lish the doctrine of his complete humanity and to define their 
relation. The question turned on whether Jesus had two na- 
tures, the divine and the human, or one, and the relation of 
the one to the other, and on whether he had two wills, the 
divine and the human, or one, and the relation of the one to 
the other. In the sixth century the discussion concerned the 
question of the two natures of Christ, and its settlement was 
due in some measure to Justinian, who called the fifth ecumeni- 
cal council at Constantinople (553), directed its discussions, and 
dictated its conclusions and its statement of the creed. 

Under the imperial form of government the legislative power 
passed from the people to the emperor, whose placita (constitu- 
tions or decrees) took the place of the leges (laws), which were 
-r . . passed by the people in the comitia (popular assem- 

CodiEesthe blies). These imperial constitutions had at vari- 
ous times been collected and published; the last 
collection was that of Theodosius, published in 438. Since that 
time the emperors had issued many new constitutions, some of 
which had radically modified previous ones, but which had not 
been collected in a convenient form. To remedy this, Justinian 
appointed a commission of ten men, with the eminent juriscon- 
sult, Tribonian, at its head, to make a complete collection of 
all the constitutions, to harmonize, clarify, and simplify them, 
^ and to state them as briefly as possible — in a word, 

to codify them. In 529 the commission published 
the result of its labors in the collection which is known as 
the Codex (code) of Justinian. 



58 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

In 530 Justinian appointed a second commission of seven- 
teen eminent lawyers, again with Tribonian at its head, to 
collect the responsa prudentium, that is, the answers, decisions, 

or interpretations, of famous lawyers, who had 
Pandects. come to be regarded as authorities in legal matters. 

They were to read all the "books pertaining to 
Roman law, written by those lawyers who had been licensed 
by imperial authority to interpret the law," collect their de- 
cisions, harmonize them, and present them in a kind of abstract 
form. This stupendous task they completed in three years, 
and published the result of their labors in a work of many vol- 
umes, which is known as the Digest, or Pandects. It is a com- 
prehensive commentary on the whole body of Roman law, 
which had been about 1,300 years in forming. 

For the use ot law students Justinian had a text-book on 
Roman law prepared. It is called the Institutes, or Principles 
of Roman Law, and is a discussion of legal principles. Without 

attempting to pursue the history of Roman law, it 

Institutes. ^^X ^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ Study of it was revived in the 
early Middle Age at Bologna, and it soon came to 
form a part of the curriculum of study in other Italian univer- 
sities. When Frederick Barbarossa went into Italy he met 
lawyers who were versed in the code of Justinian, and they pro- 
foundly influenced his conception of the imperial office. Then, 
in the thirteenth century, it became known in France, where it 
had a large influence on the formation of the absolute kingship 
of the Capetians and their successors. The present law of 
France, Germany, Scotland, French Canada, Mexico, and tlie 
civil law of Louisiana may be said to be descended from, or 
based on, the code of Justinian. 

Justinian appeared to foster industry and commerce, yet he 
was interested in them not so much because of their influence 
on the general welfare of the country as because he 
jusUnian. ° could make them a source of revenue to himself. 
In taxing industries and granting monopolies for 
the manufacture and sale of various articles he was guided, 
not by a statesmanlike knowledge of economic principles, but 



JUSTINIAN 59 

merely by the desire to increase his revenues. The culture of 
silk was introduced into Europe during his reign by some monks 
who brought the eggs of silkworms from China. (According 
to another story a Persian brought the eggs concealed in a 
hollow wand.) 

The reign of Justinian was a brilliant one from many points 
of view, yet there is hardly a doubt that the empire was in a 
less prosperous condition at the close of his reign than at its 
beginning. The decline of the empire may safely be attributed 
to oppressive taxation, to unwise governmental control of com- 
merce and industries, and to constant wars, some of them use- 
less and all of them ruinous. 

From the time of Justinian the empire was no longer either 
"universal," as the Romans proudly called it, or even Roman. 
The western provinces were in the hands of Germans, and the 
population of the rest of the empire, for the most 
Empire.'^^^ part, spoke Greek. During Justinian's reign Latin 
was superseded by Greek as the official language of 
the empire. Yet so long as there was an imperial government 
at Constantinople (to 1453) it continued to call itself the Roman 
empire. We are compelled, however, to speak of it as the Greek 
empire, to distinguish it from Charlemagne's empire, which 
was renewed in the west in 800, and which also called itself 
Roman. It will be quite impossible for us to follow even in 
outline the history of this Greek empire, and it will hardly be 
mentioned except as it occasionally became involved in the 
politics and struggles of western Europe. It must not, how- 
ever, be supposed that the Greek empire had no history worth 
recording. One needs only to follow its fortunes and misfor- 
tunes in the stately periods of Gibbon, or in the not less inter- 
esting pages of Finlay, to discover that the Greek empire had 
an important place to fill. It was a mighty bulwark against 
the barbarians of the east, and especially against the Moham- 
medan hordes which at various times made Herculean efforts 
to break into Europe by way of the Balkan peninsula. It 
would be impossible to calculate the loss in civilization if either 
the barbarians, or the Arabs, or the Turks had taken possession 



6o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of Constantinople in the early Middle Age. As it was, Con- 
stantinople kept alive Greek and Roman culture, and in the 
course of centuries transmitted a part of it to the west through 
one channel or another. Greek missionaries carried Christi- 
anity and the beginnings of culture to the barbarians beyond 
the Danube and brought them within the pale of civilization. 
Constantinople was a kind of gateway to the Orient, and during 
a large part of the Middle Age it was the leading commercial 
city of Europe, maintaining active commercial relations with 
Asia as well as Europe. 



CHAPTER IV 
THE FRANKS 

About the middle of the third century the Germans along 
the middle and lower Rhine came to be called by a new collec- 
tive name, the Franks. They were divided by their location 

into three great groups, the Salian, the Ripuarian, 
"Upper," and and the ''Upper" Franks. SaUan (the name ap- 
Franks!^^ pears first in 358) was applied to certain tribes who 
Q g lived along the sea, and probably means "dwellers 

by the salt water." Their chief tribe was the Ba- 
tam, to whom were united the Caninefates and other tribes 
Their (about 350). About the same time they began to 

Expansion, colonize the territory south of them, between the 
Scheldt and the Meuse (Maas). At first they met little or no 
opposition from th^ Roman government, because much of the 
territory which they occupied was waste, swampy, and thinly 
populated. Within the next century and a half they reached 
the Seine, and even made some settlements south of it. The 
middle group of the Franks, called Ripuarians (the name ap- 
pears about 450 and means "dwellers on the banks of the 
Rhine"), came to include the Chamavi, the Chasuarii, the Bruc- 
teri, the Ampsivarii, and others. When they attempted to 
move into the empire they met with a long and stubborn re- 
sistance from the government. In the course of the fifth cen- 
tury, however, they broke down all opposition and took pos- 
session of the territory between the Meuse and the Moselle. 
Their chief towns were Cologne (which they took and lost sev- 
eral times), Aix-la-Chapelle, and Bonn. The "Upper" Franks 
occupied the territory between the Lahn and Main Rivers. 
Their principal tribe was the Chatti, the ancestors of the mod- 
ern Hessians. Like the other Franks, they forced their way 

61 



62 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

into the empire, and after a long struggle took possession of 
the valley of the Moselle. They took Treves four times be- 
fore they were able to retain possession of it. They also took 
possession of the territory about Worms which was vacated by 
the Burgundians (443). 

When the Franks began to invade the empire they had no 
kings, but each tribe elected its duke or leader in war. Among 
them, as among all other German tribes, migration or a con- 
T^ , . siderable expansion by means of conquest was ac- 

Development r^ J "i 

of the companied by the development of a royal power. 

The duration of the struggle which took place in 
connection with the advance of the Franks into the empire 
gave their duke (elected leader in war) an opportunity to make 
his office permanent, and he soon came to be called king. About 
430 a tribe of Salian Franks was governed by a king named 
Chlodio, the first of the Merovingian family of whom there is 
any sure knowledge. He was followed a little later by Childe- 
rich (457-481), who had his residence at Tournai. He was on 
good terms with the Romans, and aided ^gidius, the Roman 
governor of Gaul, and his son Syagrius (464-486) in their wars 
with the West Goths. He was succeeded by his son Chlodo- 
vech* (481-51 1), famous for his conquests and for his subjuga- 
tion and union of all the Franks. 

His first conquest was toward the south. After Odovacer 
removed the emperor Romulus Augustulus (476), Syagrius (son 
of iEgidius), the governor of Gaul, continued to administer the 

government of that territory on his own responsi- 
481-S11. ' bility. The Germans were pressing upon him 
s. B., 5. from all sides, however, and his authority extended 

^•' ^- merely from the Somme to the Loire. In 486 

Chlodovech made war on him and, after defeating 
him, took possession of his territory. Chlodovech apparently 
understood the possibilities which the situation offered him. 
He usurped the office which Syagrius had held, assumed the 
government of the conquered territory, and conducted it as if 

* Ludovic, Ludwig, Clovis, and Louis are modern forms of Chlodo- 
vech. 



THE FRANKS 63 

he were sovereign in his own right. The inhabitants merely 
changed governors and suffered no disabilities by the change. 
It was inevitable that Chlodovech's position as independent 
governor of this conquered territory would strengthen his king- 
ship, because his authority there was greater than his authority 
over his Franks. The Franks did not migrate in large num- 
bers into the newly acquired province, and hence the inhabi- 
tants, more fortunate than those of other provinces which were 
conquered by Germans, were not compelled to divide their 
lands with unwelcome guests. There was, however, a slow and 
peaceable colonization of the waste and unoccupied lands of 
the territory. Very few Franks ever settled south of the Loire. 

As the Franks extended their sway to the south they came 
into conflict with the Alamanni, who from their seat on the 
upper Rhine were spreading westward into Gaul. Hostilities 
Con uers th t)etween them began in 496. Chlodovech was vic- 
Aiamanni, torious and compelled the Alamanni to agree to 
pay him tribute. In the first years of the sixth 
century the Alamanni broke the treaty, and Chlodovech was 
completely successful in his effort to punish them. He was 
not permitted, however, to obtain the full reward of his victory 
because of the interference of Theodoric the Great, king of the 
East Goths. True to his ''German" policy of preserving all 
the German peoples who had established themselves in the 
empire, Theodoric prevented the extinction of the Alamanni. 
They ceded the northwestern part of their kingdom to Chlodo- 
vech, and, retaining their territory on the upper Rhine and 
Danube (Suabia and Switzerland), continued to exist as a 
duchy under the protection of the East Goths. The Alamanni 
withdrew to a great extent from the territory ceded to Chlodo- 
vech, and, as it was soon colonized by Franks, the northern 
part of it came to be called Franconia. 

Unlike all other German tribes which had entered the em- 
pire, the Franks were still pagan. The conversion of Chlodo- 
vech to the orthodox form of Christianity is connected by 
tradition with his first encounter with the Alamanni (496). 
Although the story is not impossible, it is by no means above 



64 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

suspicion, and, furthermore, it is unnecessary to explain his adop- 
tion of the new faith. His wife, an earnest, orthodox Chris- 
tian, was unceasing in her efforts to bring about 

The Franks • i i . i i m i i • i 

Become the change; with his consent the two children which 

ChriSians. ^^^ ^^^ already borne him had received Christian 
baptism; for some time he had been familiarly 
associated with orthodox bishops, who frequented 
his court and who diligently improved every opportunity to 
recommend their faith to him. It was due to the persistent 
efforts of the bishop of Rheims that Chlodovech, with a large 
number of his warriors, finally yielded and accepted baptism 
at his hands. In honor of the occasion houses and churches 
were decorated as if for a great celebration. Some of his Franks 
were displeased with the change in religion and withdrew to 
neighboring Frankish tribes that were still pagan. A large 
majority of his people, however, made no objection, and even- 
tually entered the church. Although Chlodovech built churches 
and monasteries, the conversion of both him and his people was 
merely formal and had little immediate effect on their morals 
and conduct.* 

Chlodovech's adoption of orthodox Christianity had two 
important political effects: (i) In the eyes of the orthodox in- 
habitants of all the territory which he had conquered it sup- 
plied what was lacking in the legitimacy of his 
the^Change. kingship, and consequently they now joyfully sub- 
mitted to him; the clergy especially became de- 
voted to him, and the kingdom of the Franks was fortunate 
that its German and Roman subjects were united in their creed. 
(2) It led to extensive conquests, for, both Burgundians and 
West Goths being Arian, their Roman subjects turned to Chlo- 
dovech as to a deliverer, and intrigued with him for the over- 
throw of their heretical masters. Such was apparently the 
cause of Chlodovech's war with the West Goths (507-509). At 

* The two accounts of the conversion of Chlodovech are found in 
Gregory of Tours' History of the Franks, bk. II, chaps. XXX and XXXI. 
A comparison of these two chapters is sufficient to discredit the story 
of his vow in battle. 



THE FRANKS 65 

any rate no other cause is assigned, and at least one bishop in 
the kingdom of the West Goths (Quintian of Rhodez) was 
charged with intriguing with Chlodovech, and with urging him 
to make the war. And another (Galactorius of Beam) armed 
the people of his diocese and put himself at their head for the 
purpose of aiding the Franks. Chlodovech secured the help 
of the Burgundians in this war by promising them a part of 
the territory which he hoped to conquer. The war lasted for 
three years, and was ended by the interference of Theodoric 
the Great, who, by rendering timely assistance to the West 
Goths, prevented them from being driven out of Gaul. Peace 
was established by the cession of the territory between the 
Loire and the Garonne to the Franks. 

Not the least important work of Chlodovech was his union 
of all the Franks. It should be remembered that when he be- 
came king each tribe of the Franks, under its own king or 
Chlodovech duke, was independent of all the others. In one 
Unites the ^^^y or another Chlodovech removed all these rulers 

and united these tribes under his sceptre. Bishop 
■' ^* Gregory of Tours (died 594), the historian of the 

Franks for this early period, has preserved some remarkable 
stories of the cunning, treacherous, and cruel manner in which 
Chlodovech destroyed king after king. His narrative, however, 
seems to be little more than the naive accounts which were in 
circulation among the people, and can hardly be trusted in all 
its details. But it is safe to infer that Chlodovech made use 
of both fraud and force to accomplish his purpose. At any 
rate, there is no question about the important fact that he had, 
before his death, united all the Franks from the Main to the 
sea into one kingdom. 

Chlodovech died in 511, at the early age of forty-five, with- 
out having made any provision for the succession. His sons 

treated the kingdom as a private possession, divid- 
Divided^ °°^ i^g it among themselves. The age of each probably 

determined the size of his share: Theuderich, the 
oldest, received the largest portion, while Chlothar, the youngest, 
received the smallest. It may also be significant that each re- 



66 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ceived a part of the territory conquered in 485, for it was in 
this territory that each took up his residence (the four capitals 
being Metz, Orleans, Paris, and Soissons). This division was 
merely a private arrangement in which the people were not 
consulted. The kingdom belonged to the family, consequently 
only its members were concerned in its partition. Although 
there were four kings, each exercising authority in a clearly 
defined territory, there was but one kingdom of the Franks, 
and one people of the Franks. Actual division did not destroy 
the ideal unity of kingdom and people. It was as a family 
that the four sons succeeded their father. While this presup- 
posed that they would render one another mutual aid, it did 
not preclude the possibility of unbrotherly intrigues and even 
of fratricidal wars. Neither did it prevent the brothers, when 
one of them died, from putting to death his children and seizing 
his territory. 

The unity of the family showed itself most markedly in the 
common policy of foreign conquest which the brothers adopted, 
and in the partition of the spoils. In 531 Theuderich, with the 
aid of the neighboring Saxons, attacked and easily 
ofThe"^^ conquered the Thuringians. The Franks colonized 
Thunngians, ^-^e southem part of the newly conquered territory 
(between the Main and the Thuringian Forest), 
while the Saxons colonized the northern part (the Harz Moun- 
tains). After two unsuccessful attacks on the Burgundians, 
Of the Bur- ^^^ Franks conquered them (532-534) and annexed 
gundians, their territory. In 536 Witiges, king of the East 
Goths, ceded Provence and the duchy of the Ala- 
manni to the Franks, in return for which they 
promised to aid him in his war with the emperor. At the same 
time they accepted money from the emperor and promised to 
aid him against the East Goths. With characteristic treachery 
they helped neither, but invaded Italy for the purpose of secur- 
ing a part of it for themselves (538). A little later 
(probably between 540 and 550) the Franks got pos- 
session of Bavaria, although nothing is known of the manner 
in which they did this. In neither Alamannia nor Bavaria did 



Note to Map IV. — This shows the conquests of Chlodovech (Clovis) and 
his successors (the Merovingian line of Prankish kings). The figures in 
parentheses give the approximate dates of the successive conquests. The 
Pyrenees set a natural limit to their conquests on the southwest. The 
Lombards, protected by the Alps, a part of the Thuringians, by their forests, 
and the Saxons, by their swamps, were able to maintain their independence 
to the time of Charlemagne. Compare this with Map III, which shows 
the lands occupied by the Franks about 500, before the conquests of Clovis. 



^a 



B 



R X 




^ O R T H 




s 



JUTES 



50 



U 



A 



N 



N 



13 



X> 



Laud^n 
Herii 



te' 



>vo' 



.txt^e 



^i 



^ 



^^^ '^S^Tertry ^ 

5t<'Quentin^ 



'il 



^ Paris 



jSoissons 

Rheims 



'^^^^TAjrv / 



^^ 






U S^ T 



R I A 

J Orleans 



^ '-N 



V Tours 



XT 



BUR 



Poitiers 



A Y 



^{ 



O P \^ 



45 



^ s 



c A r 



^ Q U 



Pi 



thall 



A 1 



^ T A I N i: f \r^> 

(507-511) 



'.'''"\ JW 



V A s c o N I A •'; VtouIcsc _ Xv ^ /• 



50M OB- ^ ) 

"^^^ST GOTHS 



X^ 



\ 






<S. 



— i.r-^^^^y'^ <>> 



Longifiule 



West 



Longitude 





r" 



15 

1 

IV 
Kingdom of the 

MEROVINGIANS 

Showing their Conquests 

SCALE OF MILES 

T— r 



T— 1— r-TTT 



w 



100 



v^ 



R A^S 1 A \ 

Fuhia° N 

(^Slainz 

WiJi-zburg'- 



r' 



02 



^ 



tP 



V 



^) 



■v ^ 



•^^N-, -^\ 
^^^ 



K- 



[Strasbiirg 
(496) 



. f A M A N 1^ I A/ ^ ^ ^ R 1 ^ ) 
/ (536)^ 1^ y B A ^^ A^,^ y 



L.Constance 



I 






^H 



l^''«e^e 



/;'/ 



Tvient o 



r 



, Milan 



150 



i?. 




Greeuwich 



THE FRANKS 67 

they disturb the government, but left each people with a large 
measure of independence under a native duke. Throughout 
the sixth century the Franks continued with unabated vigor 
their attacks on neighboring peoples. They made frequent 
campaigns against the Avars, Saxons, Lombards, Bretons, and 
Basques, although they often met with indifferent success. 

When Theuderich died he was succeeded by his son Theude- 
bert (533-548), not only the most ambitious but also the ablest 
of all the Merovingian kings. His conduct was determined by 
the fact that he had a consuming desire to possess 
TheudetS-t. ^he title emperor. This ambition showed itself in 
his coinage; he not only stamped his own image on 
his coins, a practice hitherto unknown to the Merovingians, 
but also added Augustus to his name, thus attributing to him- 
self imperial dignity. He made strenuous efforts to get pos- 
session of Italy, as if he were conscious that his imperial preten- 
sions would be strengthened if he should become lord of that 
land. He is said to have harbored the somewhat extravagant 
plan of extending his conquests down the Danube to the fron- 
tier of the empire in order to be able to attack the emperor in 
his capital and wrest from him the imperial title. 

A profound political change accompanied the territorial ex- 
pansion of the Franks — their simple democracy was displaced 
by a monarchy more or less absolute. Whereas originally the 
G th f people were sovereign, the king was now sovereign, 
the Royal and excrcised all the powers of the state without 

Power. 

any constitutional check. The king was no longer 
subject to the people; the people were subject to the king. He 
alone declared war and made peace, sent and received foreign 
ambassadors, and made treaties and alliances. He called the 
army into the field, and either led it in person or named its 
leader. All freemen were subject to military service, and must 
come at the king's summons. He made laws and enforced them 
through his officials, who were his servants. The state was so 
completely a private possession of the king that he made no 
distinction between the government of it and the management 
of his household, using his servants indiscriminately in both; 



68 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

he administered justice through judges of his appointing, being 
himself the highest court of appeal and answerable to no court 
for his actions. All that had once been the common property 
of the tribe was now his, for he made no distinction between 
fiscal and personal possessions. All public revenues, such as 
taxes, fines, customs, and tolls, he regarded as his private and 
personal income. He possessed a formidable and lucrative list 
of crown rights, including the right to coin money, to establish 
markets, and the possession of all mines (minerals and salt). 
And finally he exercised complete authority over the church, 
appointing and deposing bishops, calling ecclesiastical councils, 
and rendering their actions valid by his sanction. 

Although the king was under no constitutional check, there 
were two bodies that were in a position to influence him, namely, 
the army and his council, (i) The kingdom had grown so 

large that it was impossible to hold a meeting of 
Marchfieid. ^^^ whole tribe, so that this, the most important 

feature of their early political life, had been discon- 
tinued. The nearest approach to it was the meeting of the 
army, which took place at the beginning of a campaign. Since 
there was usually a campaign every year, and the troops were 
called to meet in the month of March (later in May), this 
meeting was called the Marchfieid (later the Mayfield). The 
king utilized these gatherings to publish his edicts, while the 
army took advantage of them to express their desires. Their 
wishes were by no means binding on the king, but he might 
find it wise to yield to their requests. (2) The king kept in 

his presence a large number of officials — bishops, 
CounciL^^ abbots, and noblemen of various ranks — to assist 

him in the administration of the government. It 
was only natural that he should consult them on all important 
matters. They formed a kind of king's council, but were with- 
out authority. This body of councillors, a common feature of 
the governments established by Germans, may be regarded as 
the germ from which the three important departments of the 
government — the legislative, the judicial, and the financial — 
were eventually developed. For the discussion of the most im- 



THE FRANKS 69 

portant questions the king might call them all together in a 
formal way. From this custom was developed the diet, which 
offered the nobility an opportunity by combining to influence, 
if not to control, the policy of the king. 

The chief causes of the growth of the king's power are easily 
discovered. In the first place, his position at the head of his 
people during a long period of conquest gave him many oppor- 
Wh th tunities which he industriously used to his own ad- 

King's Power vantage. The conquests which they made he turned 
to his own profit rather than to that of the people. 
Acting in his own interests, he created monarchical institutions, 
and exercised authority not in the name of the people but in 
his own right. As the Franks became peasants and practised 
agriculture, it was of the highest importance to them that 
violence should cease and that peace should reign among them. 
Without foreseeing the result the people were more than con- 
tent that the king should assume the protection of the peace, 
and establish a police and police regulations for the purpose of 
punishing all who should disturb it. In the same way, since 
their old law did not apply perfectly to their changed condi- 
tions, he assumed the right to make new and fitting laws. 
And to secure the observance of them he also assumed the 
right to impose a heavy fine — the king's ban — on all who should 
transgress them. 

In the second place, it was of fundamental importance for the 
growth of the royal power that Chlodovech and his successors 
treated all conquests of both Germans and Romans as per- 
sonal rather than national. They assumed the 
Takes All right to govern directly and absolutely all the con- 
Land^^^^^ quered territories. Two considerations justified 
them in this: in the first place, they believed that 
conquest gave them the broadest sovereignty over the con- 
quered; and, secondly, they believed that they succeeded to the 
place of the imperial government and inherited, in a way, the 
absolute authority of the emperor. Chlodovech was confirmed 
in such a view of his new powers in 508, when the emperor, 
Anastasius, sent an embassy to confer on him the title of con- 



70 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

sul, and to congratulate him on his success in the war with the 
West Goths. Both as a conqueror, therefore, and as the suc- 
cessor and representative of the emperor, Chlodovech could 
regard his power as virtually absolute. It was inevitable that 
his position as absolute ruler of both Germans and Romans, 
whom he had conquered, should affect his relation as tribal 
king, and, although his Franks offered stubborn resistance at 
first, they were unable to prevent him from extending his ab- 
solute power over them. 

And, lastly, an important effect of his conquests was to put 
great riches in both money and land into his hands, and these 
he used to increase his power. He not only inherited the im- 
perial financial system in existence in the conquered 

3 c cures 

Much Land provinces, the revenues of which he appropriated, 
Income ^^^^ but he also extended this system over the Germans 

whom he conquered and even over his Franks. 
He thus became possessed of an enormous income from taxation 
and from the administration of justice (fines). In the conquered 
provinces he also claimed as his personal possession all the lands 
of the imperial domain and all public, waste, or unclaimed 
lands. He thus became the largest landholder in the kingdom. 
He was in a position, therefore, to carry on an absolute govern- 
ment because he was abundantly able to reward his faithful 
officials by grants of both land and money. It seems superflu- 
ous to add that, having once acquired great power, the king 
could with impunity disregard law and custom, usurp further 
authority, and make his will law, simply because there was no 
one in a position to oppose him. 

The absolutism of the Merovingian kings was, however, of 
short duration. By gifts of land and office the king had cre- 
ated a large class of nobles, who engaged in a struggle with the 
Th K' crown, and in the end were enabled by circumstances 

Creates a to set limits to the royal power. This nobility was 

formed of three classes: the great landed proprietors, 
the king's officials (dukes, counts), and the high clergy (bishops, 
abbots), (i) The king rewarded his chief warriors and his 
" followers" (Gefolge) by giving them large estates. In this way 



THE FRANKS 7i 

there were established a numoer of great landholding families, 
who, because of their wealth, were superior to the rest of 

the people and came to form a superior class — a 

Landlords. landed aristocracy. (2) The king's officials, being 

^ . . his personal representatives, shared in a way his 

dignity and honor. Theoretically they held office 
at the will of the king, but practically their tenure was for 
life. Furthermore, they naturally strove to pass their office 
on to their sons, so that it soon came to be regarded as heredi- 
tary, the son always succeeding to the office which his father 
had held. The longer the tenure of such an office, the more 
firmly would its honor become attached to its holder and his 
family. Thus there came to be an aristocracy of officials, deriv- 
ing its superiority or nobility from the fact that it held office 
from the king. These two classes, the landed aristocracy and 
the "official" aristocracy, soon fused, because the king enriched 
his officials with grants of land and also conferred office on the 
large landholders. Landed proprietorship and office-holding, 
at first entirely distinct the one from the other, soon came to 
be synonymous, because they were always found united in the 
same person. This was not, however, a nobility of a hard-and- 
fast type, because it was not entirely hereditary; nor was it 
exclusive, since those who newdy acquired Wealth or office were 

freely admitted to its ranks. (3) The high clergy 
Clergy!^ formed a nobility because of their great spiritual 

prerogatives and their wealth in land, acquired 
through the gifts of the faithful. Furthermore, most of them 
were taken from the families of the landed and office-holding 
aristocracy, for the king rewarded his officials by appointing 
their younger sons to bishoprics and abbacies. These three 
classes, being bound together by common ties of blood and in- 
terests, might at any time become an effective check on the 
king's power. 

From the point of view of the royal power it was unfortunate 
that Chlodovech did not fix the succession by establishing the 
law of primogeniture instead of leaving the kingdom to be 
divided among his sons. During the next eighty years his de- 



72 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

scendants made various divisions of the kingdom along differ- 
ent lines. Toward the end of the sixth century there appeared 

a threefold division into Burgundy, Austrasia, and 
kingdoms. Neustria, which, in spite of all further divisions, 

tended to become fixed. Each of these sub-king- 
doms possessed an administrative system of its own, which 
was kept intact even when they were all three held by one king. 
The fact that frequently the kings were mere boys made it 
easier for the nobles to obtain a preponderating influence in 
the direction of affairs. The great opportunity of the nobility, 
however, came in the latter part of the sixth century, when the 
royal family was divided into warring factions under the leader- 
ship of two bitterly hostile queens, Fredegonda and Brunhilda. 
In 567 Sigibert of Austrasia married Brunhilda, a daughter 
of the king of the West Goths, and Chilperich of Neustria mar- 
ried her sister, Galswintha. Chilperich, however, soon had 
^ .,. Galswintha put to death and married Fredegonda, 

Opposition *^ . . 

of the one of his former concubines. From this time to 

the death of Fredegonda (597) there was an inex- 
tinguishable feud between Brunhilda and Fredegonda, which 
involved the families of both, and led to the degradation of the 
royal power. Fredegonda did not hesitate to use the vilest 
means to accomplish her ends; she resorted to treachery, to 
the dagger, and to poison. The situation was complicated by 
the efforts of the nobles to increase their power at the expense 
of that of the king. They frequently plotted against his life 
and raised the standard of rebellion. Fredegonda even com- 
promised with them and assisted them in their rebellion, so 
blind was her rage against Brunhilda; but the latter, true to 
her instincts as a royal princess by birth, defended the rights 
of the crown against the ambitious nobles, while waging a de- 
termined war against Fredegonda. 

The death of Fredegonda (597) simplified matters somewhat 
for Brunhilda, who was then able to devote herself to the 
struggle between the crown and the nobles. With keen politi- 
cal sense she spent the rest of her life in the effort to break the 
power of the nobles and to unite all Frankland under one king. 



THE FRANKS 73 

More than once she seemed about to succeed, but at the criti- 
cal moment fortune always deserted her; the death of a king 
whom she supported or a victory of the nobles 

Brunhilda. ^^ . ^ 

would undo her work of union, and put each kingdom 
again under a king of its own. Her downfall and death were 
brought about by a league of the nobles of Austrasia (under the 
lead of Pippin and Bishop Arnulf of Metz, the ancestors of 
Charlemagne), of Neustria, and of Burgundy. They defeated 
her troops, took her and all her family prisoners, and put them 
to death (613-614). To be sure the unity for which she had 
striven was formally attained, for Chlothar II was recognized 
as king of all three kingdoms. This, however, was without 
significance, as he was helpless in the hands of the nobles. In 
614 a diet was held at Paris, which put certain re- 
Win. ^ ^^ strictions on the crown: (i) The legislative power 
of the crown was curtailed by the provision that 
royal enactments which conflicted with existing law should be 
null and void. (2) The king should no longer compel widows, 
maidens, and nuns to marry against their will. (3) If any one 
should die intestate the king should not prevent his relations 
from inheriting his property. (4) The king should be power- 
less to revoke gifts and grants made by his predecessors. (5) 
New and burdensome taxes and recently established tolls were 
tobeabolislied- (6) Only local landholders should be appointed 
to the oflSice of count. (7) No one should be condemned with- 
out a trial. (8) And the high clergy were given a large measure 
of jurisdiction over their subordinate clergy. From this action 
of the diet we may, with a good deal of assurance, infer how 
great the abuses were which the king had practised on his 
people. 

The action of the diet at Paris gives overwhelming proof that 
the nobles had won the victory over the crown. They pre- 
vented Chlothar II from perfecting the union of the 
Loi Power, three kingdoms by compelling him to establish a 
major domus (mayor of the palace) in each of them. 
Soon the Austrasian nobles demanded a king of their own, 
and Chlothar put over them his son Dagobert (622). After the 



74 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

death of his father Dagobert made an unsuccessful attempt to 
become sole ruler. After his death (639) no Merovingian king 
The Ma or ^^^ ^^^^ allowed to exercise any authority. The 
Domus government was administered by the nobility 

through the major domus. ihe king was kept m 
retirement and shown to the people occasionally as a mere 
figurehead ("do-nothing kings"). Although the government 
was conducted in his name, he had no share in it. 

The latter part of the seventh century was filled with strug- 
gles between rival candidates for the office of major domus. In 
Austrasia a nobleman, called Pippin "of Landen," had been 
made major domus. He is supposed to have had an estate 
called Landen, now a village in Belgium, but this addition to 
his name was not made till about 1300. When he died (640) 
his son Grimoald put forth a hereditary claim to his office. 
Other nobles resisted this claim, but Grimoald, after a hard 
struggle, was successful, and for a short time was the sole major 
domus of the whole kingdom. In 656 he attempted to put his 
son Childebert on the throne in place of a Merovingian prince. 
Against this the nobles rebelled, and in the struggle that en- 
sued both Grimoald and his son were slain. Years of civil strife 
followed, out of which a certain Ebroin emerged as victor and 
sole major domus of the whole kingdom (680). His murder the 
next year caused a renewal of the strife, which ended in the vic- 
tory of Pippin, a nephew of Grimoald, in the battle of Tertry 
(687). He became sole major domus and began a policy which 
tended to strengthen his power, and which resulted in putting 
his grandson, Pippin, on the throne, with the title of king (751). 

We have come at last to a fitting place for explaining the 
office of major domus. In order to understand its origin and 
character, it is necessary to describe the king's household and 
Rise of the ^^^ relation to the administration of the government. 
Major Since the kingdom was regarded as a private pos- 

session of the king, its government would also be 
regarded as a private matter of the king. That is, the kingdom 
was merely an extension of his household, and was to be gov- 
erned in the same way. That this was the king's view is clear 



THE FRANKS 



/:) 



from the fact that he used the servants of his household to 
carry on the government of his kingdom. The administration 
of his household was divided into a few departments, chief of 
which were (i) the household servants, (2) the house or palace, 
with the treasury, (3) the royal stables, (4) the royal cellars 
(wine and provisions), (5) the secretariat, (6) the royal court 
for the administration of justice, and (7) the administration of 
the provinces. The servants were under a seneschal (chief 
servant); the palace and treasury were under a chamberlain 
or treasurer {camerarius, thesaurarius) ; the royal stables were 
under a marshall (mariskalk); the royal cellars were under a 
cupbearer (pincerna); the secretariat was under a secretary 
{referetidarius) ; the royal court of justice was presided over by 
a count palatine {comes palatii, count of the palace) ; and the 
provincial administration was conducted by counts and dukes 
appointed by the king. In the first years of the kingdom the 
king no doubt received reports from, and gave orders to, the 
heads of all these departments directly. But in the course of 
time, as the w^ork of each department increased and his duties 
as king multiplied, he found it expedient to establish one head 
over them all, who should serve as the channel of communica- 
tion between him and them. This head, who was called the 
major domus, "the chief servant of the house," made his appear- 
ance among the Franks toward the middle of the sixth century. 
His position was naturally one of great influence and offered 
many opportunities for personal aggrandizement. Brunhilda, 
during her struggle with the nobles, was compelled to depend 
on this officer. In fact, she put the direction of affairs into his 
hands, and, owdng to the youth and weakness of later kings, 
he was able to retain it. As so(^n as this office became of su- 
preme importance the nobility got control of it and determined 

who should fill it. For some time, therefore (in 
the Nobility; the early part of the seventh century), the major 
thrPowlr^"^^^ ^owif5 appeared as the tool of the nobility through 

which they ruled the king and the state. The 
major domus, however, soon tried to free himself from the con- 
trol of the nobility, to make his office hereditary, and to rule 



76 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

independently of both king and nobility. This was the posi- 
tion which Ebroin had attained at the time of his death (68 1) 
and which Pippin reached by his victory at Tertry (687). As 
major domus he was thereafter the actual ruler of the kingdom 
of the Franks. 

The long civil wars between Brunhilda and Fredegonda and 
the nobles resulted not only in weakening the crown, in ad- 
vancing the nobility, and in developing the office of the major 
Th B d domus, but they also gave the border provinces an 
Provinces opportunity to separate themselves from the cen- 
tral goverimaent. When Pippin obtained the power 
(687), Aquitaine, Gascony, Brittany, Thuringia, Bavaria, Ala- 
mannia (the upper Danube and Rhine), and Alsace were to all 
intents and purposes independent sovereign states under their 
own dukes. The reunion of these provinces to the central gov- 
ernment was to be the chief work of Pippin and his successors. 



CHAPTER V 

THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 

The success of Pippin at Tertry (687) was the beginning of 
the greatness of the Karlings (Carolingians), as his family is 
generally called. The nobility threatened to strip his victory 

of much of its importance by compelling him to 
Karlings. ^ appoint a major domus for Neustria. His power, 

however, did not thereby suffer, because the man 
whom he named for the office remained faithful to him and 
soon gave way to one of Pippin's sons. The oflBice, although 
divided, was thus kept in the family. For the next half-cen- 
tury the chief work of the Karlings was to restore the kingdom 
to its former limits — a task which Pippin merely began. In 
689 he reconquered the Frisians. He also made a few campaigns 
against the Alamanni, or, as they were still called, the Suevi. 
He died, however, in 714, leaving the greater part of the work 
to be done by his successors. 

Plectrude, the widow of Pippin, almost wrecked the fortunes 
of his house. The two legitimate sons of Pippin had already 
died, leaving only young children to succeed to the office of 
Charles wo/cr domus. Pippin left also an illegitimate son 

Martei, Charles Martel, who aspired to succeed his father, 

but Plectrude had him seized and imprisoned, and 
assumed the regency in the name of her grandchildren. The 
nobles immediately took advantage of her weak rule to recover 
the power. During the struggle that ensued Charles Martel, 
escaping from his prison, put himself at the head of the Aus- 
trasian nobles who were displeased with the rule of Plectrude, 
and with their help he soon became major domus of the whole 
kingdom. He made a good beginning of the imification of the 
realm by making a few campaigns against the duke of Aqui- 
taine, the Frisians, the Bavarians, and the Suevi. He even ex- 

77 



78 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

tended his boundaries by conquering some of the Saxons. In 
732 he won the admiration and gratitude of all Christendom by 
repelling the Mohammedans, who, after conquering Spain, had 
crossed the Pyrenees (720) and were seeking to subject the 
Franks. Charles met them in battle northeast of Poitiers (the 
so-called battle of Tours, 732), and, after a severe struggle, 
overcame them. During the next years the Franks were able 
to drive them back over the Pyrenees, and thus they freed 
Europe from the Mohammedan peril which had threat- 
ened it. 

Martel supported the missionary Boniface in his efforts to 
reform the church in east Frankland and to convert the Ger- 
man tribes which were still pagan (Frisians, Thuringians, Ba- 
varians, and Saxons). ''Without the protection of 
Bo^niface/ ^ ^he prince of the Franks," wrote Boniface, "I can 
neither rule the Christian people nor protect the 
clergy, monks, and nuns. Nor could I destroy the existing 
heathen practices and idolatry were it not for his support and 
the fear which his name inspires in the people." Charles's in- 
terest in the reform of the church was, however, not very deep, 
for he made no effort to extend it to the clergy in the western 
part of his realm, although they were extremely lax in morals 
and discipline. In fact, he pursued a policy toward the land 
and offices of the church which tended to demoralize the clergy 
Gives still more. His warriors had to be paid, and he 

Lands and proposed to pay them in church offices and church 
Church lands. This policy was forced upon him by the 

Offices to His . . . . , - 

Warriors changed conditions, which require a word of ex- 
S. B., 197, planation. While the Germans were still half- 
and note. nomadic, and the work of cultivating the soil was 
done by their women and slaves, the men did not regard mili- 
tary service as burdensome, for fighting and booty were alike 
dear to them. But, as the Franks had become farmers, the 
majority of them, being without slaves, were compelled to take 
an active part in tilling their own soil. Consequently, during 
their absence on a campaign their farms were not properly 
cultivated. They were also bound to equip and support them- 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 79 

selves in the field. For this military service they neither re- 
ceived pay from the state nor were the campaigns productive 
of much booty, especially those against the invading Moham- 
medans, which gave scant opportunity for spoils. Under these 
circumstances it is not strange that the people generally tried to 
escape military service or demanded some kind of pay. In 
order to raise an army Martel had to secure the help of the 
nobility by paying them. Being without sufficient means in 
either land or money, he turned for aid to the church and 
asked that some of its fat offices and broad lands be conferred 
on his warriors in return for their great service in driving out 
the Mohammedans. 

The church was abundantly able to help him, for at that 
time it had in its possession probably one-fourth of all the land 
in the kingdom. Both monasteries and bishoprics had, through 
Great ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ faithful and through purchase, be- 

Weaithof come great landholders. Toward the end of the 
eighth century St. Denis, St. Martin of Tours, and 
Luxeuil, probably the three richest monasteries in the realm, 
each possessed about 2,000,000 acres, and some of the bishoprics 
were almost as rich. The honor, wealth, and power attaching 
to the office of bishop or abbot, made such positions very at- 
tractive, and the nobility coveted them. Their cupidity was 
aroused by the great wealth of the church, and they sought to 
obtain possession of it. In their efforts to do so Charles came 
to their aid. He had a plausible argument. Although the 
church has always held that property given to it for pious 
purposes should never be diverted to secular ends, it has more 
than once freely contributed large sums to the state in time of 
need. The common danger arising from the invasion of the 
Mohammedans was regarded by the church as a sufficient reason 
for yielding to the request of Charles. His chief warriors re- 
ceived temporary grants of church lands on the condition of 
paying a fixed annual rental to the church, and of rendering 
homage and military service to Charles. It was agreed that 
these lands still belonged to the church, and that they should 
eventually revert to it. In this the church should suffer no 



8o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

loss. But after a few years the nobles ceased to pay the rental, 
yet refused to restore the lands to the church. For the next 
fifty years the church did not cease to appeal to the govern- 
ment for justice in this matter. Charlemagne finally ended the 
controversy, but some of the lands were never restored. 

More baneful to the character of the clergy was Martel's 
practice of appointing his warriors themselves, who of course 
remained laymen, to the richest bishoprics and abbacies. 
Sometimes such a lay bishop or abbot held the office 
and Abbots! alone and received all its income; sometimes he 
held it in connection with the real bishop or abbot, 
so that there were two bishops or abbots in the same office, 
one a clergyman, the other a layman, who divided its in- 
come. 

When Martel came to die he disposed of his office of major 
domus as if it were a private possession, dividing it equally 
between his two sons, Pippin and Karlmann. Nevertheless, 
since the two brothers acted for some time in com- 
ESomes plete harmony, the kingdom did not suffer from the 
King, 751. division. Their accession, however, was the signal 
S. B., 6. for uprisings in many parts of the realm. The Aqui- 

R.', 49-si. tanians, the Alamanni, the Bavarians, and the 
Saxons rebelled, and the brothers subdued them 
only after four or five years of vigorous fighting. Scarcely had 
order been restored when Karlmann, for some unknown reason, 
resigned his office, commended his children to the care of Pip- 
pin, and, after visiting the pope, retired to a monastery in the 
neighborhood of Rome (747). Pippin, being now sole major 
domuSf and having the kingdom well in hand, determined to 
make himself king. His plan met with no opposition on the 
part of the Prankish nobles; so he sent messengers to Rome to 
consult the pope about the proposed change and to secure the 
papal influence for it. When his ambassadors returned with 
the answer of the pope (Zacharias), to the effect that it would 
be better that he who actually had the power should also have 
the title, Pippin summoned a diet to meet at Soissons (751). 
There the last of the Merovingian kings was deposed and sent 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 8i 

into a monastery, and Pippin was elected in his place. Boni- 
face anointed him with consecrated oil, and the nobles, in 
imitation of the ancient custom of elevating their chosen 
leader on a shield, raised him bodily and seated him on the 
throne. 

In the end Pippin had to pay dearly for the papal influence 
which he had so easily obtained, for it involved him in the 
affairs of Italy. The pope, although subject to the emperor, 
had become the actual ruler of Rome and of the 
Cafis^Pwin surrounding territory (the duchy of Rome). His 
into Italy. independence, however, was threatened by a new 
Lombards foe, the Lombards, another German tribe, which, 
l?aly, 568. accompanied by fragments of other tribes, had in- 
vaded Italy in 568, and taken possession of the Po 
valley (which came to be called after them Lombardy), and 
the exarchate (the territory about Ravenna). Their king, 
Alboin, did not attempt to extend his conquests further, but 
some of his nobles went on to the south and, finding most of 
the cities in a defenseless condition, easily took them. The 
territory which they conquered was divided into the duchies 
of Benevento and Spoleto. The Lombards had not been accus- 
tomed to the absolute rule of a king and so were unwilling to 
submit to a strong central government. Alboin was mur- 
dered in 573, and his successor met the same fate. The Lom- 
bards then reverted to the political organization which they 
had had beyond the Danube; their tribe was broken into sev- 
eral groups, each of which was governed by a duke. A danger 
from without reunited them. The Franks invaded their ter- 
ritory in 584, and, feeling the necessity of uniting, they chose a 
new king. He was, however, unable to develop a strong king- 
ship because the dukes gave him only a very imwilling obedi- 
ence; those of Benevento and Spoleto even remained inde- 
pendent of him. Slowly the Lombards added to their territory 
by conquest until their king could fairly hope to unite all Italy 
under his sway. 

For some years the popes had been able to check their ad- 
vances, but in 752 Aistulf, king of the Lombards, invaded the 



82 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

duchy of Rome, threatened the city with siege, and demanded 
the submission of the Romans to Lombard rule. 
Attack the 'pj^^ pope, Stephen III, unable to secure aid from 
any other source, bethought himself of Pippin's 
to Pippin. debt of gratitude to the papacy. Accordingly, in 
753, he set out for Frankland. Pippin received 
him with demonstrations of great respect, but hesitated to make 
war on the Lombards, with whom the Franks were at peace. 
Perhaps he would have refused the pope's request had not his 
brother, Karlmann, who had resigned his crown in 747, reap- 
peared on the scene as the ambassador of Aistulf. Karlmann 
not only begged Pippin not to attack the Lombards, but prob- 
ably also demanded his share of the Frankish realm for his 
sons. This seems to have decided Pippin; at any rate, he de- 
prived Karlmann of his liberty and, after making monks of his 
(Karlmann's) sons, shut them up in a monastery. In order to 
make the position of his family secure, he had himself and his 
sons anointed by the pope, who strictly commanded the Franks 
never to elect their king from any other family. Pippin's obli- 
gations to the pope were thereby increased. In the light of 
what has been said, we can understand why Pippin had made 
two important concessions to Stephen, (i) He had agreed to 
make a campaign against the Lombards on behalf of the pa- 
pacy, and (2) he had promised to give the pope Venice, Istria, 
and the territory of the exarchate. He had been led to make 
these promises not merely out of his sense of gratitude, but also 
because the pope had conferred upon him the title of patricius 
of the Romans. The approximate meaning of this title may 
be discovered from the fact that it was the official title of the 
exarch of Ravenna, the representative of the emperor in the 
"province Italy," as the territory in which the exarch exercised 
jurisdiction was called. Pippin was thereby made the pro- 
tector and lord of Rome. The title brought with it certain 
rights and duties, but the pope emphasized the duties, and the 
distance of Rome from Frankland would prevent its king from 
exercising his rights to any great extent. 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 83 

The Prankish nobles showed great reluctance to promise the 
Italian campaign, but finally yielded to Pippin's solicitations. 
Two campaigns were necessary, however — one in 754, the other 
Pippin's ii^ 756- When the Frankish army reappeared in 

Italian Italy (7c;6), Aistulf surrendered without resistance, 

Campaigns. . . . 

and made his kingdom tributary to the Franks. 
'' ' Pippin did not give to the pope all that he had 

S.*B., 45. promised; in fact, he left much of it in the posses- 
sion of the Lombards. Nevertheless he did give him about 
twenty cities of the exarchate. 

During the last years of his reign Pippin had a dominant 
position in western Europe, although he was not able to reduce 
Aquitaine and Bavaria to complete subjection. At his death 

in 768 he divided his kingdom between his two sons. 
Sons, Karlmann and Charles, afterward called Charle- 

an^Omdes ms^gne {Carolus Magnus). This division threatened 
(Charle- ^q wreck the kingdom because the two brothers 

magne). . *^ . 

were bitter personal enemies, and civil war between 
them was prevented only by the constant intercession of their 
mother. She was also determined that friendly relations should 
be re-established between the Franks and the Lombards, and 
to this end brought about the marriage of Charles to the daugh- 
ter of Desiderius, king of the Lombards. To this the pope 
objected, but, on being assured that Desiderius would satisfy 
all the papal demands in regard to the restitution of certain 
cities, he withdrew his opposition. Desiderius, however, then 
renewed the policy of his predecessors to get possession of the 
rest of Italy. Fearing that he was too weak to accomplish this 
by force of arms, he resorted to diplomacy. He felt that he 
must first secure Rome. So he went to the city, made a friend 
of the pope, and created a party of supporters there. His in- 
fluence in Rome was rapidly becoming supreme, much to the 
displeasure of Charles, who felt that Desiderius was acquiring 
the position in Rome which belonged by right to himself as 
the patricius of the Romans. It was probably due to this that 
the friendly relations between Charles and Desiderius lasted 



84 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

but a short time. Charles divorced his wife within a year and 

sent her home, thus mortally offending Desiderius. 
Great^Sole^ Karlmann died in 771 and Charles, disregarding 
^Jng. the rights of his infant nephews, took possession of 

S. B., 7. the whole realm. Karlmann's widow fled with her 

r'^ ^3* children to Desiderius, and begged hirn to avenge 

at the same time the injustice that had been done 
her sons and the insult offered his daughter. 

Just then the position of Desiderius in Rome was endangered; 
Stephen IV discovered the cunning of Desiderius, and learned 
that he was scheming to get control of Rome. The death of 

Stephen soon followed, and the next pope, Adrian I, 
Lombards. ^ ^n aristocratic Roman, was hostile to Lombard in- 
g g ^ ^ fluence in Rome. Desiderius felt that he must strike 

at once. He first sought a quarrel with Adrian I 
by calling on him to come to Lombardy and anoint the sons of 
Karlmann as kings. The pope not only refused to do this, 
but demanded that Desiderius hand over the cities which he 
had long ago promised to surrender to the pope. Desiderius 
in turn resisted the pope's demand, attacked the papal ter- 
ritory, and took possession of some of its cities. Adrian I 
appealed to Charles for help (January, 773). The appeal was 
most unwelcome to both Charles and his nobles, but they felt 
that they could not refuse. By embassies Charles tried to set- 
tle the difficulties between the pope and the Lombards, but 
Desiderius was unyielding. Accordingly Charles set out for 
Italy with his army (773). The Lombards were no match for 
the Franks. Desiderius fled to Pavia, which the Franks be- 
sieged. All the other Lombard cities soon surrendered and the 
whole country was overrun. Karlmann's widow and children 
were taken prisoners and disappeared. They were probably 
immured in monasteries. Leaving his army before Pavia, 
Charles spent Easter at Rome, where, at the earnest solicitation 
of the pope, he renewed the promised ''donation of Pippin." 
In May (774) Pavia surrendered, and Desiderius with all his 
family, including the divorced wife of Charles, fell into Charles's 
hands. They too ended their lives in monasteries. A bitter 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 85 

disappointment was in store for the pope, in that Charles re- 
fused to keep his oath in regard to the "donation of Pippin," 
because he had determined to make himself king of the Lom- 
„ bards. This he now did, thereby inheriting all the 

King of the political interests of Desiderius, whom he had just 
deposed. So long as Charles had been merely the 
overlord of the Lombards and the patricius of the Romans he 
was willing to increase the power of the pope that he might act 
as a check upon the king of the Lombards. But since he had 
become king of the Lombards his point of view had changed, 
and he no longer desired an increase in the power of the pope. 
It was to his interest to prevent the formation of a strong politi- 
cal power in Rome. Accordingly he broke his oath and refused 
to "restore" all that he had promised. Adrian was deeply 
offended at this, and for some time his relations with Charles 
were strained. Charles finally relented somewhat, and by way 
of compromise gave him certain Tuscan cities and some taxes 
from the rest of Tuscany and from Spoleto. 

Charles assumed the position, title, rights, and possessions of 
the king of the Lombards, and the territory, although still 
called the kingdom of the Lombards, became a part of the king- 
dom of the Franks. Charles left its government about as it 
was, but put Franks over some of its counties. As in Frank- 
land so in Lombardy, he used bishops and abbots as counts, 
and entrusted them with the administration of secular matters 
in their territories. In 781 he took a step which emphasized 
the fact that Lombardy was really a separate kingdom; he made 
his son Pippin, a child of four years, king of the Lombards, and 
left him in Italy to grow up among his subjects.* 

Time was to show that the conquest of Italy was a political 

mistake, because it disregarded the barriers which nature had 

established between the two countries. The Alps alone, to say 

nothing of the differences in race, would prevent the union of 

* Spoleto and Benevento were not included in the first conquest 
(774), but in 776 the duke of Spoleto submitted to Charles; the duke 
of Benevento, however, would do nothing more than acknowledge 
Charles as his overlord, Charles sent several expeditions against him, 
but never succeeded in reducing him to subjection. 



86 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the two countries from ever becoming more than nominal. Only 

on the east was the way open to the Franks for successful 

territorial expansion. No mountains impeded the 

The Saxon i • i t • i i •, i 

Wars. march in that direction, and pagan peoples had 

S B^.y no recognized rights. In fact, it was regarded as 
o., i6, 17, 22. i^Q duty of a Christian sovereign to conquer and 

Jv., 54) 55* 

Christianize them. Charles's first war of con- 
sequence was against the Saxons, whose conquest was im- 
portant because it expanded Frankland to the east. Christian- 
ized a large population that had hitherto been pagan, and 
reinforced the German element in his kingdom by the addition 
of a hardy people that was still uninfluenced by Rome and 
Roman institutions. The war with the Saxons dragged on 
for more than thirty years; Charles made his first campaign 
against them in 772 and his last one in 804. At the approach 
of the Frankish army the Saxons would flee; if overtaken, they 
would submit to the terms imposed upon them, but would 
rebel as soon as the Frankish troops were withdrawn. The 
Franks charged them with being "faithless" and "rebellious," 
but it should be remembered that they were fighting to pre- 
serve their religion and their liberty. Annual campaigns 
against them, severe punishments for their rebellions, the pres- 
ence of Frankish troops, officials, and clergy, and stringent laws 
failed to subdue them, and Charles was able to break their 
spirit only by deporting thousands of them into Frankland 
and settling Franks in their place. Their territory was divided 
into counties, and put under Frankish counts. After Christi- 
anity had made a beginning among them, their ecclesiastical 
organization was completed by the erection of bishoprics 
(Miinster, 804; Bremen, 805; Paderborn, 805 or 806; Halber- 
stadt, Osnabriick, and Verden, whose exact dates are unknown). 
Scarcely had the Saxons been reduced and Christianized when 
they began to work for the expansion of Germany to the east 
by conquering and Christianizing the pagan Slavs east of them. 
Later generations invented so many stories about Charles's 
victories over the Mohammedans that it is worth while to give 
an account of his relations with them. In 777 the Moham- 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 87 

medan governors of a few cities in northern Spain, who were in 
rebelHon against their lord, the Mohammedan ruler of Spain, 

came to Charles while he was in Saxony. They 
in^^air?^^ offered their allegiance to him as their lord and 
s B 70 promised to surrender their cities to him if he would 

send an army to their aid. In the hope of extend- 
ing his sway over Spain he eagerly consented. His motive was 
purely one of conquest. One division of his army, passing 
through the west Pyrenees, stormed Pampeluna, a Christian 
(Basque) city, and endeavored to conquer the Basques of the 
surrounding country. His troops all reached Saragossa, but 
its governor, who was one of those who had visited him, was not 
able to deliver it to him, nor was the Frankish army able to 
take it. So Charles soon had to raise the siege and begin to 
retreat. When he reached Pampeluna he ordered its walls to 
be torn down in order "that its inhabitants might not be able 
to rebel again." In the mountain passes the Basques attacked 
his army and inflicted some loss on it — an incident which gave 
rise to a series of legends which were incorporated in the epic 
poem, "The Song of Roland." This first expedition against 
the Mohammedans failed utterly. 

In order to strengthen the frontier against both the rebellious 
Basques in the Pyrenees and the Mohammedans in Spain, 
Charles, in 781, united Septimania and Aquitaine and put as 
The Spanish ^^^^ ^^^^ them his infant son, afterward known as 
Mark Ludwig the Pious. He also appointed an energetic 

(March). . 1 . . . ^ \^ 

regency with instructions to move against the Mo- 
hammedans as vigorously as possible. It was some time, 
however, before an advance could be made. In 785 the Franks 
got possession of Gerona and a few other cities, and a part of 
the Mediterranean coast. In 795 Charles constructed a line 
of forts and towers along the frontier (about half-way between 
the Ebro and the Pyrenees), and put the whole district under 
a count. This was the creation of the Spanish mark ("border- 
land"). Its inhabitants were constantly engaged in a kind of 
guerilla warfare and occasionally they made a real campaign 
against the Mohamm^edans, By the year 611 they had pushed 



88 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

their frontier forward to the Ebro, although a few cities to the 
north of it were still in the hands of the Mohammedans. The 
mark rendered an important service to the little kingdom of 
Asturias and Galicia (that part of Spain which had never been 
conquered by the Mohammedans), by protecting it on the 
east. At that time the Mohammedan fleets were attacking 
the islands in the Mediterranean. Mallorca and Minorca (the 
Balearic Islands) obtained help from the Franks, successfully 
resisted the Mohammedans, and put themselves under Charles's 
protection (799). As he possessed no fleet he could give no 
aid to the more distant islands, Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily, 
which were unable to defend themselves and so passed under 
Mohammedan sway. 

Bavaria, having been permitted to go its way during the 
struggles of the sixth century, was virtually independent. Al- 
though its duke, Tassilo, had taken an oath to be faithful to 
the king, he seldom appeared at court. For some 
Reduced. Unknown reason trouble arose between him and 
S B 7-II Charles in 785. This increased until 787, when the 
king sent his troops against him. Tassilo submitted 
without resistance and Charles restored his duchy to him as a 
fief. But the next year, while Tassilo was planning a revolt, 
Charles called him to a diet and seized him. Treasonable 
charges were made against him and he was condemned to death 
by the nobles. Charles, however, commuted the punishment 
to seclusion for life in a monastery. He then annexed Bavaria 
and appointed royal counts to administer its government (788). 
The Avars, who had come into Europe during the last years 
of the reign of Justinian, had established themselves on the 
middle Danube, where they held sway over an extensive ter- 
ritory. Their invasion of Bavaria in 788 (due, it 
Destroyed. was said, to the treacherous invitation of Tassilo) 
SB 7 1 3 ^^^ ^° their ruin. After some ineffectual attempts 
to chastise them, Charles's armies finally defeated 
and subjected them (795, 796). They later made some feeble 
attempts to rebel, but were overcome in a few campaigns (802, 
§03), and wer^ soon absorbed in the Slavic and Germanic peo- 



Note to Map V. — This map shows the territory of the Franks at the ac- 
cession of Charlemagne (768) and the additions which he made to it by 
conquest. Certain points should be noticed about these conquests, to ex- 
plain their significance for later history, (i) The Spanish mark was the 
origin of the Spanish kingdom of Aragon, which was to have an important 
part in the reconquest of Spain from the Mohammedans in the later Middle 
Age. (2) The annexation of Lombardy led to the coronation of Charlemagne 
as emperor at Rome; this connection between Italy and Germany was per- 
petuated by the formation of the "Holy Roman Empire" in the time of 
Otto the Great, and that connection was to have disastrous consequences 
for the political development of both countries. (3) The annexation of the 
Saxons reinforced the German element in Charlemagne's empire by the 
addition of a vigorous stock untouched by Roman influence, and so checked 
the Romanizing of the German race. The Franks in what is now northern 
France were already partly Romanized and were to form part of the French 
nation; the rest of the Franks in the Rhine valley, along with the Alemanni, 
Bavarians, Thuringians, and Saxons, retained their German language and 
customs and constitute the German nation. (4) The marks along the east- 
ern frontier were created from Slavic territory and prepared the way for the 
later expansion of the Germans eastward. 



k 



35 



V 
THE 



"^ L THE 

rM EMPIRE OF CHARLEMAGNE, 
'^^^ AT HIS DEATH (814), • 
^ ^ I SHOWING HIS CONQUESTS 

p \ The area inside the Sotted line represents the 

''*^i. } Kingdom of Charlemagne at his accession in 
^>^ 768; the area between this and the outer blacik^ 
line, the territory added by his conquests 




I ^"^ SICIL 

' \e A N "-^^ 



from 



Greenwich 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 89 

pies who came in and settled in their territory. Charles's in- 
terest in the expansion of the church showed itself here. He 
raised the bishop of Salzburg to the rank of archbishop, and 
commanded him to prosecute missionary work among the 
mixed population of the conquered territory. The archbishop 
sent out monks and priests as missionaries, and the work of 
Christianizing them was hastened by the numerous German 
colonists who settled in the lands north of the Drave. 

For some thirty years Charles had scarcely sheathed his 
sword, but his wars were now nearly over. Extraordinary suc- 
cess had attended his arms. He had not only subdued the re- 
bellious provinces of the Frankish kingdom, but he had also 
enlarged his realm by the conquest of new peoples. To the 
kingdom which he had inherited he had added a part of Spain, 
nearly all of Italy, and a broad territory running from the Baltic 
to the Adriatic. With so vast a domain in his possession it 
was only natural that he should covet the more pretentious 
title of emperor. For the same reason his subjects would quite 
as naturally regard him as emperor in fact, and be eager for 
him to secure the title which corresponded to his actual power. 
Hence it is evident that his coronation as emperor, on Christmas, 
800, came as a recognition of his power and as the culmination 
jjjg of his glory, (i) His wide sway, embracing, as it 

"Imperial" did, all of Western Europe that was still Christian; 
(2) his authority over Rome, the ancient capital of 
the empire, and (3) his protection of the church and his zealous 
extension of Christianity naturally led to the observation that 
in reality he occupied the position which the emperor had once 
held. It was not mere flattery that Alcuin, the great scholar 
of his court, referred to his kingdom as "imperial" (796-797). 
When the pope was driven out of Rome (799), and the emperor 
at Constantinople was deposed and the government seized by 
a woman, Alcuin in his letters declared that Charles was the 
ruler of the whole Christian empire, which God had committed 
to him to be ruled, and that his power was greater than that 
of both pope and emperor, and his position more exalted than 
theirs. It is not strange, therefore, that many persons thought 



90 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

that the time had come to elevate him to the rank which corre- 
sponded to his power, and to give him a title which would more 
adequately express the dignity of his actual p>osition. At that 
time there were good grounds either for holding that the throne 
was vacant or for setting up an anti-emperor, and Charles was, 
in the opinion of all the west, the only worthy candidate for the 
place. 

Certain other ideas must also be taken into account in order 
to explain the coronation of Charles as emperor. 

(i) Although there had been no emperor in the west since 
476, the people there still generally regarded themselves as a 
part of the empire. To them the empire, being divinely or- 
dained for the government of the world, was both 
Indivisible indivisible and indestructible. The fact that they 
destructible were Under kings who were actually independent 
of the government at Constantinople did not affect 
their idea of the unity of the empire or their relation to it. 
Consequently they were immediately concerned in the deposi- 
tion of the emperor and the usurpation of power by a woman. 

(2) The inhabitants of Rome, after having been excluded for 
centuries from the management of the government, had just 
begun to remember that once the people of Rome had ruled 

the world, and that they had elected the emperor 
Rule the ^nd conferred his power upon him. The recollec- 
Agafn ^^^^ ^^ their former greatness stirred them to the 

effort to recover it. This led to the formation of 
what may be called an "ancient republican'^ party in Rome, 
which for several centuries tried to restore the city to the politi- 
cal position which it had held under the republic. This party 
undoubtedly exercised a certain influence on the coronation of 
Charles by reasserting at this moment the ancient supremacy 
of the people of Rome. 

(3) It was not necessary, however, for the inhabitants of 
Rome to base their right to elect an emperor or to set up an 
anti-emperor on the authority which they had possessed under 
the ancient republic. Rebellion was so common that the peo- 
ple might claim it as their right; it was indeed the estab- 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 91 

lished way of getting rid of an objectionable or inefficient 
emperor. In practice, the army, the senators, and the people 
^, p , , had, either singly or combined, chosen emperors and 
Right to deposed them. Hence the participation of one or 
all of these three groups in such an action was suffi- 
cient. Nor was it necessary that such an election should be 
held in any particular place. There is no question that the 
people everywhere throughout the empire acted upon what 
seemed to them their inalienable right to set up an anti-emperor 
whenever, in their opinion, their welfare justified it. For, after 
all, everything depended on whether the one whom they 
elected was able to establish himself in power. Toward the 
end of the pontificate of Gregory II (715-731) the people of 
Italy, the Romans at their head, angered by imperial taxation 
and the imperial opposition to the use of images in the churches, 
threatened to set up an anti-emperor. They were deterred 
from doing so merely by questions of expediency and not by 
constitutional considerations. The election of an anti-emperor 
was a theoretical deposition of the actual emperor, and it was 
left to the newly elected one to secure himself by destroying 
the other. The question of supremacy had alw^ays to be settled 
by force. Numerous precedents not only justified the election 
of Charles as an anti-emperor but also bound him to establish 
his powder by destroying the line of emperors at Constantinople. 
Let us now look at the events that led directly to the corona- 
tion of Charles as emperor. The ancient republican party in 
Rome was under the leadership of the aristocratic Roman 
^, ^ . family of which the deceased pope, Adrian I, had 

The Pope in i. x / 

Trouble been a member. Pope Leo III had attempted to 

0/ Charles. exclude them from all share in the government of 
s B -28 ^^^ ^^^^' ^^^^^y incurring their hostility. The 
bitterness between him and them was increased by 
mutual charges and recriminations till 799, when the party re- 
belled against him. They attacked him while he was making 
a solemn procession through the city, and, after beating and 
wounding him, imprisoned him in a monastery. He soon 
escaped to Spoleto and sent word to Charles to come to his 



92 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

aid. Charles was at that moment engaged in a campaign 
against the Saxons, and hence could not go at once to Rome. 
He sent ambassadors to conduct Leo into Frankland. Roman 
ambassadors also appeared before him and made serious charges 
against Leo, which, if true, would have made it scandalous for 
him to continue in the highest office of the church. 

Charles was placed in a dilemma, because the leading church- 
men of the day declared that the pope, being the head of the 
church, was not subject to any court and hence could not be 
^ _ tried. Charles yielded to these so far as to send 

S. B., 48, 49. . ^ 

his ambassadors with Leo to Rome, with the com- 
mand to restore him to his office, but nevertheless to inquire 
into the charges which had been made against him. The am- 
bassadors were unable either to prove or to disprove the charges, 
but seized some of the pope's opponents and sent them as pris- 
oners to Frankland. Since they were unable to end the con- 
troversy between the pope and his opponents or to restore 
order in the city, Charles himself came. He first undertook to 
investigate the charges which had been made against Leo, but 
could make no progress, because the pope's accusers refused to 
swear to the truth of their charges. Finally Leo, in order to 
clear his good name, mounted the pulpit in St. Peter's and took 
a public oath that he was innocent of all the crimes laid to his 
charge* (December 23, 800). 

On Christmas Charles attended the services in St. Peter's, 

and as he was rising from his knees beside the grave 
Coronation, of St. Peter the pope crowned him, and the Romans 
o., 20. who were present shouted: "Long life and victory to 

s B^^" • 8 Charles, Augustus, crowned of God, the great and 

peace-bringing emperor of the Romans." There is 
convincing evidence here that the act of the pope had been 
planned; he must have prepared the crown; the Romans must 

* In spite of the assertions of the clergy that the pope could not be 
tried by any court, Charles's investigation of the charges against Leo 
was in reality a trial. It is impossible to suppose that Charles would 
have permitted Leo to continue in the office if the charges against him 
had been proved. Yet we can only surmise what steps would have 
been taken to remove him from the office. In 555 Pope Pelagius I 
had similarly, by a voluntary oath, cleared himself of unproved charges. 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 93 

have known what was going to take place in order to know 
that it was the imperial crown which was placed on his head: 
and they must have been taught the formula with which they 
in unison greeted the new emperor. The leading men of the 
city were present, and it is not to be supposed that they merely 
obeyed the pope's orders in greeting Charles as they did; they 
must have had some share in the plans: that is, they must have 
held a meeting in which they actually elected Charles, and his 
coronation by Leo was merely the publication of that fact. 
Although the chronicles of the time are somewhat obscure and 
brief in their narratives of this event, some of them either state 
or imply that such a meeting had been held, in which Charles 
had been elected emperor. After electing him they proceeded 
to crown him in the manner customary in Constantinople. 
That is, as, in Constantinople, the patriarch was called on to 
anoint and crown the newly elected emperor, so the Romans 
called on the pope to anoint and crown Charles. Neither the 
patriarch nor the pope created the emperor; each acted as the 
agent of those who had elected him. As the patriarch often 
took an active part in the election as a partisan of one or the 
other candidate, so Leo evidently had a share in the election of 
Charles. 

Einhard, the intimate friend and biographer of Charles, has 
made the surprising statement that Charles was unwilling to 
accept the imperial title, and that he afterward declared that 
he did not know that the pope was intending to 
Dislpieased crown him, and that if he had known it he would 
Because it not have gone into the church that day. From this 

Made Him . * . -' . 

a Rebel. it Can Only be inferred that, if Charles was informed 

S. B., 7:28. of his election, he refused to accept the title, and 
that the pope and the Romans, determined to make 
him emperor, proceeded to crown him, even against his will, 
in the hope that he would accept it after the coronation had be- 
come an accomplished fact. The reason of his reluctance to 
accept the election is indicated by Einhard, for, after reporting 
what Charles had said about it, he proceeds: ''The emperors [at 
Constantinople] were very angry because he accepted the title 
of emperor, but Charles bore their hostility with great patience, 



94 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and with his magnanimity overcame their ill-will and hostility, 
and sent them frequent embassies and called them brothers." 
That is, he hesitated to accept the title because its acceptance 
would make him a usurper in the eyes of the existing line of 
emperors at Constantinople. He knew that his acceptance of 
the election would put him on a hostile footing with the em- 
peror and he was unwilling to make a war for the title. 

In Constantinople it was confidently expected that Charles 
would resort to arms and endeavor to extend his sway over the 
whole empire, as usurpers before him had done. They re- 
Charle did g^-^ded his acceptance of the title as a declaration 
not Fight of war. The crown, which was thrust upon him, 
he finally accepted, and, although that act was a 
declaration of war against Irene, who was then empress, he 
refused to appeal to arms. He proposed that there should be 
two emperors over the empire, for the existence of two em- 
perors and the actual division of the government would not 
destroy the ideal unity of the empire. He was already in 
diplomatic communication with Irene (the object of the nego- 
tiations is not certainly known), and this he continued, with the 
purpose of securing the mutual recognition each of the other as 
emperor. It was reported in Constantinople that his embassy 
was prepared to ask Irene to confer her hand in marriage upon 
him. The embassy to which this matter was entrusted reached 
Constantinople at the moment of her downfall and deposition. 
Her successor, whose election was scarcely more "regular" 
than that of Charles, refused to acknowledge him. All of 
Charles's efforts to obtain recognition from him were unavail- 
ing. Finally war was actually begun between them for the 
possession of Venice. In 8io the Franks besieged it and com- 
^ „ pelled it to surrender. The Greek emperor then 

S. B., 13, 14. . 

sued for peace, and Charles offered to restore Venice 
to him on condition that he himself be recognized as emperor. 
Peace was established on these terms, and Charles's joy over 
the recognition of himself as emperor and the ending of his 
hostile relations to the Greek emperor was unbounded. He 
was no longer a usurper, but a legally recognized emperor. 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 95 

Although the imperial crown neither brought an actual in- 
crease of power to Charles, nor added to his resources, it never- 
theless gave him a new basis for the conduct of his government. 

As emperor he believed that he was directly respon- 
Duty!^ sibl^ t^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ Christian living of his subjects. 

Accordingly he ordered all his subjects between 
the ages of twelve and seventy to take an oath to be obedient 
and true to him as emperor, and to serve God and obey his 
commands according to their knowledge and strength. 

After the imperial coronation Charles was seldom involved 
in serious wars, and hence was able to devote himself to the 
work of governing his wide realm. Each tribe within his em- 
Charles P^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ body of customs which were still 
Preserves jn force. He took measures to preserve the laws 

the "Laws." ^ 

of the Saxons, Frisians, and Thuringians, by having 

■' ''■^^' them reduced to writing. All these laws, having 

been made to fit conditions prevailing in a primitive community, 

were inadequate to meet the requirements of a more complicated 

society. The advancement of the Germans in 
Legislation, civilization made a great deal of new legislation 

necessary. A distinction was made between these 
bodies of tribal law, which were fundamental and could not be 
changed except by the whole people, and the king's law, which 
concerned those things that were not determined by the tribal 
law. The king could enact only supplementary legislation. 
Charles made no attempt to make a harmonious code of laws 
for the whole empire, but was content to legislate for each par- 
ticular case or need as it arose. Although the legislative au- 
thority was in his hands, his laws were enacted "with the ad- 
vice and consent'' of the nobles and high clergy who surrounded 
him as a body of counsellors. 

For the purpose of administering the government he divided 
his empire into small divisions called ''counties," over each of 

which he placed an official called a "count." It was 

Counts. ^ 

the duty of the count to carry on the government 
in the name of the emperor, to administer justice, to act as his 
financial agent, and to lead the troops of his county in time of 



96 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

war. The great extent of the empire and the consequent 
number of counts made it impossible for Charles to exercise an 
efficient control over them. There is abundant evidence that 
the counts took advantage of this lack of supervision to abuse 
their power; they sold justice, oppressed the weak, favored the 
rich and powerful, and enriched themselves at Charles's expense 
by fraudulently retaining money which they had collected for 
him. The task of looking after so many counts was beyond 
the ability of one man. It was a fatal weakness in the gov- 
ernment that the counties were not grouped in provinces, with 
a man at the head of each, charged with the control of all the 
counts in his district. Such a position had been 
that of the dukes, but Charles removed all the 
dukes in his empire (with one or two exceptions), because 
they regarded themselves not as the officials of the emperor 
but as the representatives of the people, and the champions of 
local liberty. They regarded all action of the central govern- 
ment as ''interference," and were prompt to rebel on the least 
provocation. Hence he destroyed them and their office, too. 
,,. , That Charles perceived the weakness of his gov- 

Misst 

Dominici. ernment is proved by the fact that he sent out royal 
s. B., 9. messengers {mis si dominici) to inquire into the 

0., 21. conduct of the counts. For this purpose he joined 

a layman to a high clergyman and sent them out 
together, assigning them a fixed district. They were instructed 
to investigate the whole administration of the counts, to ex- 
amine the life of the clergy and monks, to right all wrongs, to 
hear appeals, and to refer doubtful or important cases to the 
emperor. The creation of the missi was a step in the right 
direction, but there were not enough of them, and the territory 
assigned them was so large that they were not able to perform 
their duties thoroughly and efficiently. Charles added his 
own efforts to those of his missi, and by his unceasing activity 
tried to make good the lack of organization. 

Owing to the number and importance of Charles's wars, the 
army was the object of his special attention. Because of the 
size of the empire the principle that military service was obliga- 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 97 

tory on all freemen could no longer be carried out. The emperor 
was slow to admit this, and called on the Lombards to fight in 
Limited Spain and beyond the Danube, the Aquitanians 

Military beyond the Rhine and in southern Italy, and the 

Service. ... 

Franks in Spam, m Italy, and on the middle Dan- 
■' ^^ °* ube. These long and distant campaigns were ruin- 
ous to the common freemen, who not only received no pay but 
were even compelled to bear their own expenses throughout 
the war. Added to this was the fact that their lands were 
poorly cultivated during their absence. Either the system had 
to be modified or the common people would be ruined, (i) 
Charles attempted to provide relief by decreeing that only 
those who possessed a certain amount of land were bound to 
serve when called upon, and that all others, divided into 
groups of two, three, four, five, or six, should contribute ac- 
cording to the amount of their possessions to the support of 
one of their number who should take the field while the others 
^ remained at home. (2) Many freemen commended 

Freemen \ / j 

Become themselves to some rich nobleman, or to the king, 

and became vassals, and agreed to render service 
in return for support. The Gefolge of the ancient German kings, 
the antrustiones of the Merovingians, became the vassals of the 
Karlings. In such cases their lords were expected either to 
aid them in escaping military service, or to supply them with 
^ arms as well as with all the necessities of life, (s) 

Freemen ^ _ ^^^ 

Become Sometimes the lord provided for such support by 

giving his vassals a sufficient amount of land to 
supply them with the means of existence and of equipping 
themselves for war. The effect of all this was seen in the in- 
creasing disappearance of the class of freemen and the formation 
of a dependent class of vassals. In other words, the burden- 
some character of Charles's wars hastened the development of 
feudalism. 

Charles acted as protector and ruler of the church in his 
empire in the most thorough-going manner. He disregarded 
the law of the church which prescribed that all elections of the 
clergy should be canonical, and appointed both bishops and 



98 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

abbots. The clergy were, in fact, state officials, differing in no 
important respect from the counts, for Charles appointed 

them, controlled them while in office, and used them 
Controls the in the administration of secular matters. He fol- 
thTpope'^^ lowed the practice of his ancestors in giving church 

property as fiefs to his warriors and in naming 
laymen as abbots. So free was he in using the lands of the 
church in this way that he seems to have made little or no 
distinction between them and the crown lands. Einhard, his 
biographer, was a layman, yet he was the abbot of four monas- 
teries and besides held a "living" in the church of Pavia. 
Certain monasteries which were put under Charles's special 
protection were called "royal," and were controlled by him 
almost as if they were his private possession. He alone made 
laws for the church, and there was nothing either important 
or trivial that was not touched on in his legislation. Much of 
his legislation, in fact, concerned ecclesiastical matters, and it 
furnishes convinciiig proof that he controlled the church in all 
respects. 

Charles had three sons, among whom, following the estab- 
lished custom, he divided his empire. In 806 he fixed the 
boundaries of the kingdom of each of them, and prescribed the 
p .^ principles which should govern them in their atti- 

forthe tude and conduct to one another. Unfortunately, 

his two oldest sons, both of whom had shown excel- 
lent ability, died, thus leaving the empire to the youngest, 
Ludwig, who had given evidence of nothing but incompetency. 
In 813 Charles, warned by severe illness of his approaching end, 
summoned a general diet at Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen) and, 
with the consent of all present, conferred the imperial title on 
Ludwig, who nevertheless, as long as Charles lived, occupied 
a subordinate position. The coronation of Ludwig as emperor 
took place with great ceremony in the cathedral at Aachen 
(81*3). Clothed in his imperial robes and wearing his imperial 
crown, Charles first knelt with Ludwig in prayer before the 
high altar. He then addressed his son at some length on the 
duties of his office, and, after Ludwig had promised to heed his 



THE HOUSE OF CHARLEMAGNE 99 

advice and obey his commands. Charles ordered him to take 
from the altar a golden crown, which had been placed there, 
and crown himself. This Ludwdg did, and the people shouted 
''Long life to Emperor Ludwig." 

It is impossible not to see a decline in Charles's government 
during the last years of his reign. He was unable to prevent 
his ofl&cials and great landholders — counts, bishops, and abbots 
A D I'n alike — from oppressing the large middle class of 
in the Small landholders and the poor freemen, and re- 

ducing them to vassalage. The central govern- 
ment was weak in organization and was unable to protect its 
subjects, who were fast losing their relation as subjects to the 
government and sinking into the relationship of vassalage, or 
dependence, on the nobles. Charles perceived the injurious 
effects of the changes that were going on, but w^as powerless to 
prevent them. His health was broken by his many hard cam- 
paigns and by the heavy labors which his office imposed upon 
him. He was deeply depressed by the death of his two sons, 
which crushed his hopes, for he w^as well aware of the unfitness 
of Ludwdg to rule. For the last year or two of his life the state 
of his health made it impossible for him to take an active part 
in the government. He spent much of the time at 
Charles, 814. Aachen, where he died, January 28, 814, in conse- 
S B 7 30-u ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^ attack of pleurisy. On the evening 
of the same day his body w^as placed in a marble 
sarcophagus of ancient Roman workmanship, and buried with 
simple ceremony in the cathedral which he had built at Aachen. 
The whole empire was overwhelmed with sorrow, for all loved 
him as a father. His greatness outlived him and grew with 
the centuries, and popular imagination never wearied of in- 
venting new deeds of valor to increase the glory of his name. 



CHAPTER VI 

THE DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE OF 
CHARLEMAGNE 

By the coronation of Charles in 800 the imperial line, which 
had been lacking in the west since 476, was renewed. On the 
face of it his coronation looked like a renewal of the old empire, 

yet it might be pointed out that there were many 
the\nipire° important points of difference between his empire 

and that of Constantine or Justinian — a difference 
in extent, in the machinery of government, in race, in language, 
and in the general degree of culture. In spite of such differences, 
however, Charles was really carrying on the work which Rome, 
first as a republic and then as an empire, had been doing. That 
is, he was civilizing all the peoples of his vast realm and raising 
them to the same plane of culture, and even extending the 
boundaries of the civilized world by conquering barbarians and 
subjecting them to the civilizing influence of Rome. The 
political, religious, and intellectual unity of western Europe 
appeared likely to be attained if his work were continued long 
enough. After his death this appearance was seen to be de- 
ceitful; his government, which had been unifying the peoples 
of his empire, was followed by a period of political chaos during 
which his empire broke up into a number of small independent 
kingdoms which then gradually came together in new group- 
ings to form the chief states of Europe. Charles had extended 
his empire in spite of racial differences and natural boundaries. 
After his death the influence of natural obstacles to unity, such 
as mountain ranges and differences in race and language, again 
made itself felt, and the states of Europe began to take shape 
somewhat in accordance with the existing racial conditions 
and the boundaries which nature had prescribed. 
The chief causes of the dissolution of the empire are easily 

too 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE loi 

discovered. The essential elements of unity which had once 
existed in the empire had either disappeared or had been pro- 
foundly modified. The spoken Latin was already 
Elements developing into separate languages, such as Italian, 
DiSppear Spanish, and French; in many regions German law 
had either displaced or modified the law of Justinian; 
and the imperial administration had broken down completely. 
In fact, the empire had been dismembered, for the Moors had 
conquered Africa and Spain, and Britain was occupied by Ger- 
mans who paid no allegiance to the emperor. And in the ter- 
ritory added to the empire by conquest, the Latin language, 
Roman law, and the imperial administration were unknown, 
and hence it was already foreign in character to the rest of the 
empire. The Christian church, however, still held to the idea 
of unity, and during the four troubled centuries of invasions 
and disorder (400-800) had helped keep alive the idea of a 
world-wide Roman empire. 

There were also other causes of the dissolution. The different 
peoples had not forgotten that they had been conquered, and 
they were only waiting for an opportunity to assert their inde- 
Q j^^ pendence. Each of these peoples, conscious of it- 

Causes of self, felt that it had the right of self-determination, 
a principle which is directly opposed to that on 
which the world empire was built. So the old tribal feeling of 
separation and desire for freedom reappeared as soon as the 
force which had held them together was removed, and it was 
soon apparent that the various parts of the empire were far 
from being homogeneous, and that the differences in race, tribe, 
temperament, customs, and language had not been removed. 
Furthermore, the rulers themselves destroyed the unity of the 
empire by dividing it among their sons. And lastly, the family 
of Charles rapidly degenerated, his descendants being, with 
few exceptions, weaklings, unfit to rule and incapable of com- 
prehending the task which devolved upon them with the title 
of king or emperor. Having no conception of the duties of 
their office they conducted themselves in such a manner as to 
strengthen and abet the forces which were tending toward the 



I02 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

dissolution of the empire. Not one of them devoted himself 
intelligently and wisely to the work of governing the territory 
which he possessed. The history of the ninth century is a 
luminous commentary on these causes of dissolution. 

The reign of Ludwig the Pious (814-840. The French 
call him Louis le Debonnaire) was a long series of blunders 
which degraded the empire, opened the way for foreign 
invaders, caused ruinous civil wars among his sons, and 
Ludwi the ^^^ ^^ ^^^ fi^nsil and permanent division of the em- 
Pious, pire. He lacked all the qualities of a ruler, and 
was better fitted to be a monk than an emperor. 
Lacking intelligence and being without will, he was the slave 
and tool in turn of the clergy, his sons, and his wife. Sluggish 
and indifferent to the affairs of state, he deserted his post at 
the most critical moments to spend weeks in hunting and fish- 
ing. He did little for the defense of the frontier, and during 
his reign Northmen ravaged his northern provinces and Moham- 
medans plundered the Mediterranean coast. 

In 817 he narrowly escaped death by an accident, and in 
consequence determined to fix the succession. He accordingly 
divided his empire among his three sons and yet retained the 
Division of imperial authority until his death. To the younger 
the Empire, sons, Pippin, who received Aquitaine, and Ludwig 
the German, who received Bavaria, the title of 
king was given, while Lothar, the eldest, received all the rest 
of the territory, and was crowned emperor. Yet the unity of 
the realm was to be preserved, for Lothar was to have supreme 
authority in all foreign relations — declaring war, making peace, 
and receiving and sending embassies. This division was des- 
tined never to be put into effect. Ludwig the Pious, after the 
death of his wife (818), was determined to retire to a monastery, 
but unfortunately his counsellors persuaded him to take a 
second wife instead. His choice fell on Judith, a daughter of 
Count Welf, whose ancestral possessions were in Suabia. To 
the still greater misfortune of the empire she bore him a son, 
who is known as Charles the Bald. For this son she was de- 
termined to secure a kingdom and, since all the territory of the 
empire had been divided among the older sons, she sought to 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE 103 

annul the settlement of 817. In 829 she began her machina- 
tions, and till the death of the emperor (840) intrigues, divi- 
sions of the empire, and civil wars followed each 
judTth"^^ ° other in bewildering succession. It would be idle to 
recount them, futile as they all were and barren of 
results. Judith's insane ambition for her son grew till she finally 
boldly planned to dispossess all the other sons of Ludwig the 
Pious and to have all their territory conferred on Charles. 
To add to the confusion, Lothar was eager to rid himself of all 
his brothers, and even of his father, and to acquire the whole 
empire for himself. In the midst of civil war Ludwig the Pious 
died (840), leaving the question as far from solution as it had 
been in the beginning. 

Lothar, greedy as ever, tried to secure the whole empire. 
He attacked both Ludwig the German* and Charles without 
being able to overcome either. They finally united against 
him and defeated him (841). In 842 Ludwig and 
Strasburg Charles met at Strasburg, and after taking oaths 
Oaths. of mutual fidelity renewed the campaign against 

s. B., 16. Lothar, who soon offered to make terms with them. 
R.', 68. A preliminary peace was made (842), and a commis- 

sion sent out to make a description of the various 
provinces of the empire in order that a just division of it might 
be made. The commission made its report, and the three 
Treaty of brothers concluded a treaty at Verdun (843). By 
Verdun, 843. the terms of this treaty Lothar, as the oldest, re- 
s. B., 17, 18. ceived the imperial title with Italy and a strip of 
■' ^^* territory extending from Italy along the Rh6ne and 

Rhine to the North Sea. The territory east of this strip (East 
Frankland, or Germany) was ceded to Ludwig, who was called 
the German because his subjects were chiefly Ger- 
Germany, mans. The land west of this strip (West Frankland, 
Lotharingia ^^ France) went to Charles the Bald. It must be 
remembered that nationality did not cause the 
division, nor was it taken into account in fixing the boundaries. 

* As a mnemonic aid I have used the German form of the names of 
those who were king in East Frankland (Germany), and the French 
form of the name of those who ruled in West Frankland (France). 



I04 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

In this division Ludwig and Charles were far more fortunate 
than Lothar, because each was ruler of a compact territory, with 
natural boundaries more or less clearly marked, and occupied 
by peoples more nearly homogeneous than were Lothar's sub- 
jects, who were composed of Italians, Celts, and Germans. 
The kingdom of Lothar was unfortunate geographically as well 
as racially. It was a long narrow strip with no natural bound- 
aries, and it was broken into two parts by the Alps. It could 
not possibly be made into a nation, and soon broke into many 
fragments. Ludwig was fortunate because his subjects were 
for the most part Germans, and because to the east of them 
there were barbarous peoples, by the conquest of which he 
could enlarge his territory. Although the population of Charles's 
kingdom belonged to different races, they were all more or less 
Romanized and, like the subjects of Ludwig, they formed at 
least the basis for the development of a nation. 

For the next hundred years the history of these divisions is 
extremely confusing and barren of interest. It is necessary, 
however, to relate certain facts, unattractive as they may be, 
in order that the reader may understand the origin of some of 
the most important institutions of the Middle Age. Let us 
therefore take in order the three divisions — the imperial crown 
and Italy, which were inseparably connected, France, and 
Germany. 

So long as Lothar remained emperor (843-855) the brothers 
preserved a kind of unity in the empire by holding diets to- 
gether, and for the most part maintaining friendly relations 
with one another. It was assumed that all the ter- 
the Empire, ritory which had once belonged to Charlemagne still 
belonged to his descendants; although divided, it 
was still a family possession. Lothar's territory was sadly 
troubled in the north by the Northmen, who invaded it yearly, 
and in the south by Mohammedans, who were making desperate 
efforts to conquer all southern Italy. Lothar remained in the 
north without, however, doing anything of importance to re- 
sist the invasions of the Northmen. In 844 he associated his 
son, Ludwig II, with him in the government and sent him into 



Note to Map VI. — This shows the division of the empire between the 
three sons of Louis the Pious. The youngest son, Charles, took the western 
part, which corresponds pretty closely to modern France; its population 
comprised Romanized Gauls and that part of the Franks which had also 
become fairly well Romanized by this time; the language was a corrupt 
Latin, which was to develop into French. Note that the Franks, who were 
Germans, gave their name to the country. The next older son, Ludwig, 
took the eastern part, comprising the bulk of the German tribes and the 
conquered Slavs; the Roman influence was slight in this territory. Lothar, 
the oldest brother, had the title of emperor, and received a long narrow 
strip of land including the two capitals of Rome and Aachen (Aix-la-Cha- 
pelle). North of Italy this strip consisted of two parts, the Rhone valley 
and the valley of the Meuse and Rhine. The Rhone valley was Roman in 
population (including Romanized Burgundians) and most of it is to-day 
within the boundaries of France. The northern part was partly Roman 
and partly Germanic, and has been fought over through the centuries by 
France and Germany. 



Lonifitude 5 West from Greenwich Longitude 



East 



from 




ch 10 



15 



■id 



xzw 







S^ 



RUGEN 



VI 



'-./ 



THE DIVISION OF VERDUN, 

843, 

Showing the Beginning of 

France and Germany 



SCALE OF MILES 



-1 — I — r— r-1 — I I I I 
50 100 



200 



13o 



Ji. 



N 



s 



.^^9: 
^^V^"^ 






^. ^s 



ST FR 



(FRANCONIA) 



'»/-' 



^ 



Prague^ 
B O 



^ 



Regensburg 

(Ratisbon) 




DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE 105 

Italy to rule. Ludwig II was crowned by the pope as king of 
the Lombards (844) and as emperor (850). He exerted him- 
self to the utmost against the Mohammedans, but, as they re- 
ceived constant reinforcements from Africa, he was not able to 
master them.* 

When a fatal illness overtook Lothar he divided his empire 
among his three sons and retired to a monastery, where he died 
within a few days (855). Ludwig II (855-875) received the 
, imperial title with Italy; the kingdom of Burgundy 
Germany fell to Charles (855-863); and Lothar II (855-869) 
Lotharingia. obtained the rest. From this Lothar II his terri- 
Meerien^Syo ^^^ received the name of Lotharingia, which is 
still perpetuated in Lothringen (Lorraine), a prov- 
ince which Germany wrested from France in the 
Franco-Prussian War (i 870-1 871) and which has now been re- 
stored to France. Charles died in 863, and his brothers divided 
his kingdom. At the death of Lothar II, in 869, his land should 
have gone to his brother Ludwig II, but his uncles, Ludwig the 
German and Charles the Bald, seized it, and by the treaty of 
Meersen (870) divided it between them. Lothar II, during the 
last twelve years of his reign, had been so engrossed with an in- 
famous attempt to divorce his wife that he had paid little at- 
tention to the affairs of state. The emperor, Ludwig II, the 
last of the three brothers, died in 875, and with him his family 
line became extinct. 

At the death of Ludwig II Italy entered on a troubled period. 
For some years it was the scene of bloody struggles between 
rival candidates for the crown of Lombardy as well as between 
those for the imperial crown. One candidate after 
iJitaly.^ another appeared and compelled the pope to crown 
him, but all displayed their weakness rather than 
their strength. Finally, in 891, Guido, duke of Spoleto, obtained 

* In 846 they even attacked Rome, and plundered the churches of 
St. Peter and St. Paul, both of which were outside the city's walls. 
To prevent the recurrence of this Lothar ordered the pope to build a 
wall around St. Peter's and the houses which had sprung up about it. 
Pope Leo IV (847-855) put the order into effect, and that quarter of 
the city has ever since been called after him the Leonine quarter. 



io6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the crown, and the next year he associated his son Lambert 
with him in the office. Their rule was so oppressive that both 
the pope and the Italian nobles besought Arnulf, king of the 
East Franks, to come and deliver them from Guido and his son. 
Arnulf came into Lombardy, but, meeting with opposition, was 
soon compelled to return to Germany. In response to a second 
urgent invitation from the pope, Arnulf went to Italy again 
(896), and was crowned king. He then proceeded 
Amu^r"^ to Rome, which he took by storm, and was there 
S B 2^ crowned emperor by the pope (896). But as Lam- 
bert was still alive Arnulf's imperial title was not 
above dispute. He was taken ill, however, and had to with- 
draw to Germany without in any way improving conditions in 
Italy. On the contrary, for the next fifty years they grew worse, 
if that were possible. In 950, Adelaide of Burgundy was, by 
the death of her husband, left empress. One of the rival can- 
didates for the throne, hoping to secure the crown for his family, 
seized her for the purpose of compelling her to marry his son. 
In her distress Adelaide appealed to the dukes of 
Appeals to Bavaria and Suabia as well as to Otto I, king of 
Germany Germany. Both dukes were willing to help her, 
because they coveted Italian territory, but Otto I 
forestalled them. He came into Italy, freed her from her 
captor, married her, and assumed the crown of Italy. He also 
negotiated with the pope for the imperial crown, but the pope 
refused it. Otto recognized Berengar, marquis of Friuli, as 
his vassal king in Italy, and went back to Germany. Berengar 
promptly rebelled against him and sought to increase his power 
in central Italy. In this he came into conflict with the pope, 
John XII. About 932 a certain Alberic had driven the emperor 
out of Rome, and had assumed the government of the city with 
the title "Prince and Senator of the Romans." Unscrupulous 
and efficient, he was able to keep the factions in the city as well 
as the successive popes in subjection until his death (954). His 
son Octavian succeeded him in the government of Rome, and 
in 955 was elected pope, assuming the title John XII (955-964). 
He sought to make his family supreme in central Italy, and so 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE 107 

came into conflict with Berengar, who was supported by a fac- 
tion in Rome itself. Remembering that Otto I had once de- 
sired the imperial crown, John now offered to crown him em- 
peror if he would come and destroy Berengar. Otto ca,me and 
was crowned emperor (962). For the next three centuries Italy 
and Germany were united because it was believed that the 
king of Germany had a right to the crown of Italy and to the 
imperial crown.* 

The political dismemberment of Italy, already far advanced, 
made giant strides during the one hundred and fifty years after 
the death of Charlemagne. In the south, owing to the weak 
government of the Greek emperors, who still held 
membered. nominal sway there, many cities had become inde- 
pendent, and Mohammedans were making deter- 
mined efforts to get possession of all the southern part of the 

* Nothing could be more dreary than the narrative of the dissolu- 
tion of the empire, but a recital of the facts seems necessary, if only 
to give the reader an impression of the chaotic condition of political 
affairs and to show how" the family of Charlemagne had degenerated, 
and how low the title of emperor had sunk. The following list of those 
who, from 800 to 962, received the imperial crown, may be of service: 
Charlemagne, 800-814. 
Ludwig the Pious, 814-840: crowned 813 by himself, and 817 by 

the pope. 
Lothar I, 840-855: crowned emperor 817 by his father or by 

himself, 823 by the pope. 
Ludwig II, 855-875: crowned by the pope as king of the Lom- 
bards 844, and as emperor 850. 
Charles the Bald, 875-877. 
Karl the Fat, 881-887: died 888. 
Guido, duke of Spoleto, 891-894. 
Lambert, his son, 892-899. 
Arnulf, 896-899. 
Louis III of Provence: 901, king in Pavia; 902, emperor; driven 

out 902; died 928. 
Berengar: 888, king of Italy; 915, emperor; murdered 924. 
Rudolf II of Upper Burgundy: king of Italy, 924-934; withdrew 

from Italy and united the two Burgundies 934. 
Hugo of Aries, 926-947, but driven out of Rome by Alberic II. 
Lothar II, 947-950. 

Berengar II, vassal king of Otto I, 951-961. 
Adalbert. 
Otto I: king of Italy 951; emperor 962. 



io8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

peninsula; in the central part the power was divided among 
the pope and the dukes of Benevento, Spoleto, and Tuscany; 
in the north there was a nominal king of the Lombards or of 
Italy. From the death of Lothar I (855) to the coronation of 
Otto I (962) no less than eight men were crowned emperor, and 
thirteen bore the title of king of Italy. Owing to the rivalries 
and inefficiency of these would-be kings and emperors an im- 
portant political change had been going on in Italy. 
Become As the central government which had been estab- 

Rukr°^^^ lished by Charlemagne broke down and disappeared, 
the bishops in the cities, who were also the imperial 
counts or governors, gradually came to exercise an independent 
political authority over their dioceses. By successive grants 
of immunity and jurisdiction from the emperors and by usurpa- 
tions, in accordance with the general feudal tendency of the 
times, the bishops obtained a new relation to their dioceses; 
from officials of the emperor they had become lords of their 
counties. That is, each city with the territory about it had 
become a little city-state which, for the present, was ruled in 
an autocratic way by its bishop as its lord. But 
of the ^ the inhabitants of the cities were beginning to grow 

MovSnent restive under this arbitrary rule, and were prepar- 
ing to rebel, to drive out their lord, and to establish 
a communal form of government. This spirit manifested itself 
first in Rome, where, as in every other city, the bishop had be- 
come the lord of the city. We have already seen that in 800 
the people of Rome rebelled against the government of Leo III 
and expelled him from the city. More than once during the 
ninth and tenth centuries the pope was forced to choose between 
the curtailment of his political authority in Rome and the total 
loss of it. 

Having traced the fortunes of the imperial crown, let us now 
turn to West Frankland, or France. Many parts of it, like the 
cities of Itafy, were tending toward independence. The disin- 
tegration of the kingdom was hastened by the foolish actions of 
Charles the Bald, who, in his craze to acquire more territory, 
neglected to govern what he had. He made several wars against 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE 109 

his brothers and nephews simply for the purpose of conquest, 
but paid no attention to his officials, who now held office at 

their own pleasure and administered the government 
membered!" ^^ ^^^V pl^ased. He did nothing to check the North- 
men who, year after year, ravaged the kingdom, 
o., 26, 27. He died in 877, leaving his kingdom to his three 
69-71.' * sons. The two oldest soon died, and the nobles 

refused to submit to the third, who was a mere child, 
known afterward as Charles the Simple. They elected Karl 
the Fat, who was already king of the East Franks and emperor. 
For three years he was the nominal ruler of virtually all the 
territory which Charlemagne had held. But a chronic illness 
rendered him unfit to govern and, matters going from bad to 
worse, the nobles deposed him (887). The unity of the West 

Frankish realm now disappeared for a while. The 
France, noblcs north of the Loire elected Odo, count of 

Bnttany^' Paris, king, but the duke of Aquitaine refused to 

acknowledge him and ruled his duchy quite inde- 
pendently. Brittany was left to itself, and Burgundy was 
divided into two Httle kingdoms. In 879 Count Boso of 

Vienne had usurped the royal title and made him- 
Burgundy. ^^^^ master of Lower Burgundy (Aries), and a little 
„ later (888) another count, Rudolf, seized Upper 

Burgundy. Burgundy and was crowned king. The formation 
S. B., 22. of these two Burgundian kingdoms resulted in the 

loss of their territory to France for several centuries. 
They united in 934 to form the kingdom of Aries, or Burgundy, 
which passed in 1032 into the possession of the king of Ger- 
many, thus becoming a part of the empire. 

The condition of France in the ninth and tenth centuries 
was wretched in the extreme. For more than u hundred years 
marauding bands of Northmen ravaged the country and devas- 
,^ ^, tated it with fire and sword. The kings did little 

Northmen. _ '^ 

or nothing to resist their invasions, but left the 
work of defense to the nobles and bishops. The Northmen 
became bolder and bolder, and finally a large colony of them 
took possession of the valley of the lower Seine. Their 



no EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

duke, Rolf (called Robert after his baptism), accepted Chris- 
tianity and became the vassal of Charles the Sim- 
Normandy, pie, whose daughter he received as his wife. Under 
Q the strong rule of Robert and his successors his 

duchy became one of the most important prov- 
inces of France. His people were called Normans and his 
duchy Normandy. 

Since the death of Charlemagne feudalism had been taking 
on a definite form; that is, the royal officials had been steadily 
increasing their power at the expense of that of the crown, and 
the counts had made their offices hereditary and 
Feudalism. were governing their territories virtually as inde- 
pendent lords. They were often able to resist the 
king and did not hesitate to make war on him. The chief of 
these were now known as the great vassals, and their territories 
as the great fiefs, the principal ones of which were Flanders, 
Poitou, Anjou, Gascony, Aquitaine, and Normandy. The 
holders of these great fiefs were turbulent and rebellious. Since 
each one of them alone was almost a match for the king, 
when they combined their forces he was helpless before them. 
Odo (888-898) endeavored to make his position as king more 
secure by acknowledging Arnulf , a Carolingian who was king of 
the East Franks, as his lord. This vassal relation, however, 
was merely nominal, and probably had no effect on 
his rebellious barons. His reign was troubled by 
s. B^., 22. annual invasions of Northmen, and by the intrigues 
and rebellions of his great vassals, who tried to re- 
store Charles the Simple to the throne. Charles was actually 
crowned at Rheims (893), but Odo maintained himself till his 
death. When Odo came to die he designated as his successor 
not his brother Robert, duke of Francia, who was his heir, but 
Charles the Simple (898-929). He was accepted 
the^Simple. ^Y ^he barons, but was no more successful in restor- 
ing and maintaining order than Odo had been. In 
923 Robert, duke of France, regretting that he had not seized 
the crown at the death of his brother Odo, rebelled and usurped 
the title of king. His troops met those of the king near Sois- 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE iii 

sons (923) and gained a victory, but Robert himself was slain. 
His son Hugo refused to be elected, so the nobles elected his 
son-in-law, Rudolf, king of Upper Burgundy. France was 
again divided till the death of Charles the Simple in 929, when 
Rudolf was acknowledged throughout France. At his death 
(936) the nobles recalled from over the sea (d'Outremer) the 
son of Charles the Simple, Louis IV, who had been taken for 
safety to the court of his grandfather, king Edward of England. 
After a stormy reign (936-954) Louis IV was succeeded by his 
son Lothaire (954-986), who was only eight years of age. Under 
this child-king matters grew worse; he was involved in quar- 
rels with his clergy as well as with his nobles. He left the 
country ripe for revolt. His son Louis V (986-987) succeeded 

him, but died the next year. There was but one 
Kariingsin Carolingian left, Charles, duke of Lower Lotha- 
France. ringia. He was, however, without power, and could 

Hugh Capet not hope to obtain the votes of the great vassals. 
King, 987. The choice of the nobles fell on the strongest of 
O.^ 29. them all, Hugh Capet, duke of Francia. Hugh had 

been following an ambitious policy, and had suc- 
ceeded in getting possession of a good deal of land. He had 
become the feudal lord of several important fiefs, among them 
the counties of Blois, Champagne, Chartres, and Anjou, and 
the duchies of Burgundy and Aquitaine. He had made friends 
of the clergy too, and so when the royal family became extinct 
he was unanimously elected king. He was crowned with the 
high-sounding title, king of the Gauls, Bretons, Danes (Nor- 
mans), Aquitanians, Goths, Spaniards, and Gascons. His 
actual authority, however, was slight, his great vassals being 
able to maintain a large degree of independence. 

Of the empire of Charlemagne there still remains Germany, 
the affairs of which we must now consider. There we find much 

the same state of affairs as in Italy and France — 
in^ Germany, everything was tending toward political dissolution. 

Ludwig the German (843-876), although one of 
the most sensible of the descendants of Charlemagne, was 
not equal to his task. Moreover, his realm suffered much from 



112 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

invasions by the Northmen; he was compelled to make many 
campaigns against the Slavs, who frequently ravaged his eastern 
provinces; and the last fifteen years of his reign were troubled 
by rebellions of his three sons. He was, on the whole, success- 
ful in resisting the barbarian invaders, and he even extended 
his boundaries toward the east by conquering and subjecting 
several Slavic tribes. He dealt wisely with his rebellious sons, 
displayed a good sense of justice toward his people, and gave 
intelligent support to mission work among the barbarians out- 
side his realm. When compared with his brothers, sons, and 
nephews, he seems worthy of praise. At his death 
Fat^ 884-887. h^ divided his kingdom among his three sons, but 
after the death of two of them it was reunited in 
884 under the third, Karl the Fat, who had already been 
crowned emperor by the pope (881). At the same time he was 
chosen king of the West Franks, so that he was now the nominal 
ruler of all the lands which Charlemagne had once held. As 
his powers increased his inefficiency became more and more 
apparent, and, as matters went steadily from bad to worse, the 
nobles of Germany deposed him and chose his nephew, Arnulf, 
in his place (887-899). 

Arnulf, although king only of the East Franks, felt that 
since he was a Karling all the empire belonged of right to him. 
But instead of attempting to get possession of it all, he con- 
tented himself with assuming merely the overlord- 
887^-899. s^ip ^f 2,11 the little kingdoms into which the empire 
had been dissolved. Odo, when elected king of the 
West Franks, appealed to Arnulf and recognized him as his 
overlord. In return Arnulf sent him a crown and recognized 
him as king of the West Franks. In the same way the kings 
of both Upper and Lower Burgundy, and Berengar of Italy 
recognized Arnulf as their overlord. His reign was occupied 
with wars against invading barbarians. In the battle on the 
Dyle (891) he defeated the Northmen and inflicted such losses 
on them that they did not attempt a further invasion of Ger- 
many. In his wars with the Slavs, although meeting with some 
reverses, he was eventually successful in bringing the Slavs on 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE 113 

his eastern frontier to recognize his overlordship. Unfortunately 
for Germany he was troubled with the ambition to imitate his 
famous ancestor, Charlemagne, and coveted the empty title oi 
emperor. In 894, in response to an embassy from the pope and 
some of the nobles of Rome, he went into Italy to attack Guido 
of Spoleto, After he had taken Bergamo by storm northern 
Italy submitted to him. He assumed the government of the 
country and dated his documents ''in the first year of my reign 
in Italy," but at the same time he left Berengar as his vassal 
king. Since Arnulf was recalled to Germany, he was unable 
to proceed to Rome then, but two years later the pope again 
besought his aid, promising him in return the imperial crown. 
To this call Arnulf responded. He first deposed Berengar and 
made himself sole king of Italy. He then went to Rome, where 
he was refused admission by the widow of Guido, who was 
holding the city for her son Lambert. Arnulf 
Amuif °896. Stormed the city and was crowned emperor by the 
SB 2^ P^P^j Formosus. After compelling the Romans to 
swear that they would be true to him he set out 
for the north to punish Berengar, who had reasserted himself as 
king. On the way to the north he was taken ill and was com- 
pelled to return to Germany. At his departure the Italians, 
offended at his assumption of power, rebelled against him and 
undid everything that he had done. 

Arnulf made one of his illegitimate sons, Zwentibold, king of 
Lorraine, and arranged that his legitimate son, Ludwig IV, 
commonly called Ludwig the Child, should succeed him in the 
Lud ■ th ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ kingdom. Ludwig the Child was only 
Child, six years old at Arnulf's death, but the nobles ac- 

cepted him as king. No regency was appointed, 
but a kind of council, consisting of many bishops and nobles, 
directed affairs. They rewarded themselves by ceding to 
themselves large tracts of the crown lands, and in general it 
may be said that they regarded rather their own advantage 
than the interests of the realm. Fortunately for the unity of 
the kingdom, Zwentibold governed Lorraine so tyrannically 
that the people rebelled against him, slew him, and acknowl- 



114 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

edged Ludwig the Child as king. During the reign of this child- 
king both Germany and Italy were invaded by the Hungari- 
ans, or Magyars, as they called themselves. Almost 
the Magyars, ^very year they invaded one or more of the Ger- 
man provinces, burning the towns and villages, 
killing the men, and carrying away the women and children. 
Mounted on swift horses, they passed like a destructive whirl- 
wind over the country, and the Germans, who fought on foot, 
were helpless before them. 

As if the woes of the land were not already great enough, the 
nobles, knowing the weakness of the government, engaged in 
destructive feuds. Violence and lawlessness, which had been 
Feuds of the ^^ ^^^ increase since the death of Charlemagne, 
Nobles. culminated in this reign. The strong oppressed 

Five Duchies the weak and the nobles fought one another. The 
Saxony, Weakness of the government led to the establish- 

LorrSne^^' i^^^nt of a duke in each of the five large divisions of 
Suabia, Germany — Franconia, Suabia, Bavaria, Saxony, 

and LotharingiaP— In^^axony the ducal title was 
■ ■' ^'^' ^^' usurped by a member of'^e family of Count Liu- 
dolf ; in Franconia by a member of the farmly of Count Conrad; 
in'Lorraine by Count Reginar, who had fought against Zwenti- 
bold; in Alamannia (Suabia) first by Count Burchard and then 
by Count Erchanger; and in Bavaria by Arnulf, son of the 
Marquis Liutbold. These usurpers were easily successful, not 
only because of the weak rule of the child-king, but also be- 
cause they appealed to the latent tribal feeling and local desire 
for independence. Thus, the duke of Bavaria was, in a way, 
the symbol of Bavarian unity and freedom. In the same way 
and for the same reasons the dukes of the other duchies were 
hailed with satisfaction by their respective peoples. The duke 
was a centre about which his people could rally, and as each 
duchy now had an organization of its own, its tribal and tem- 
peramental differences were perpetuated. The dukes in Ger- 
many correspond to the great vassals in France and to the city- 
states in Italy, and were quite as turbulent and rebellious 
against their kings. Although in Italy independent city-states 



DISSOLUTION OF THE EMPIRE 115 

were formed, and in France several independent kingdoms were 
established, in Germany the process of disintegration did not 
proceed so far. Although the country was divided into five 
great duchies the dukes of which exercised certain sovereign 
or crown rights, the principle of unity was maintained by the 
king. 

With the death of Ludwig the Child the family of Charle- 
magne came to an end in Germany and a new king had to be 
chosen. The honor fell on Conrad, duke of Franconia. Con- 
rad I (911-918) had an old-fashioned conception 
gii-'giS. ' ^^ ^^^ ofl5.ce of king, and was not willing to accept 
the situation which had been brought about by 
the development of feudalism and the growth of local inde- 
pendence in the duchies. He was able, active, brave, and am- 
bitious to rule as a king of the old school, regardless of the rights 
which his great vassals, the dukes, were now in the habit of 
exercising. His reign was spent in the vain en- 
Poiicy!^ ^^ deavor to make good the traditional authority of 
the king over the dukes, who stubbornly resisted 
him at every turn. He allied himself closely with the clergy, 
who, at a council at Altheim (916), attempted to coerce the 
dukes by threatening with the ban all who should resist the will 
of the king. But even with this aid of the clergy Conrad 
could not reduce the dukes to subjection. He grew weary of 
the unsuccessful struggle, and at his death designated as his 
successor his most powerful rival, Henry, duke of Saxony. 
With the accession of the Saxon family Germany entered on a 
new period of its history. 



CHAPTER VII 
FEUDALISM 

Before we take up the history of the separate states of 
western Europe which emerged after the dissolution of the 
Society in empire of Charlemagne, it will be helpful to con- 
Mediaeyai sider the peculiar structure of society which pre- 

States Unlike . ^ . . ... 

Modern vailed among them. Conditions of life (social, 

°^^^ ^* political, economic, and cultural) were so different 

from those with which we are familiar, that without this pre- 
liminary survey we should miss the meaning of historical events. 
The form of society which prevailed in the mediaeval states 
is known as "feudalism," or the "feudal system." * If we seek 
the quality in the feudal state which distinguishes it most es- 
sentially from the modern state, we shall find it in 
Society the fact that the bonds which held society together 

Private'and "^ere the personal and private relations of men to 
Personal Q^ie another, rather than the obedience of men to 

Relations. ' 

public law and government. In every age and 
every state both kinds of relations exist side by side. On the 
one hand are the private and personal relations between em- 
ployer and employed, master and servant, landlord and tenant, 
leader and follower, patron and client — relations in which the 
superior exercises considerable influence over the lives and ac- 
tions of the inferior. On the other hand are the public insti- 
tutions — the central government, the public officials, the law, 
and the courts of justice, which have coercive power over the 

* In reality this general name covers two distinguishable systems. 
Strictly speaking, feudal relations are the relations between members 
of the ruling class, based on the holding of a "fief" (Latin feudum). 
The relations of the mass of the people to the upper landowning class 
constitute the "manorial" system, a name taken from the small farm- 
ing communities, or manors, in which the agricultural laborers lived 
under complete subjection to their landlord. 

ii6 



FEUDALISM 117 

actions of citizens. According to our idea of a well-organized 
society (and it was also the Roman idea), public authority is 
superior to private authority. Men must obey the laws of the 
state, must be prevented by courts and public officials from 
pursuing their own interests to the injury of others or to the 
disturbance of the peace, must support the government by pay- 
ing taxes. And because of the powers exercised by the state 
the citizens are enabled to live in peace, to hold their posses- 
sions in security, to act together in large ways (such as inter- 
course and trade) to their common advantage. 

In a state of society in which the government is so ineffective 
that strong and powerful persons are not made to obey, and 
weak and poor persons are not given protection and security. 
Effects of ^^^ comparative position of public and private au- 
Weak thority is reversed. When the government cannot 

Government . . . 

on Private keep Order or defend the territory, powerful indi- 
viduals are likely to take authority into their own 
hands, defend their own possessions, fight out their own quar- 
rels, and control their own followers; on the other hand, the 
weak and unprotected are forced into dependence upon their 
powerful neighbors. Under these conditions, private and per- 
sonal relations become the important factors in determining the 
actions of men and constitute the real bonds of society. 

There had been no effective government in western Europe 
during most of the time since the collapse of the Roman empire. 
The invasions brought about the decline of the Roman govern- 
ment, and the Germanic tribal kings who then 
Public^ assumed control over the parts of the empire in the 

Government -^est Were incapable of maintaining the machinery 

in Western ^ . . ^ . 

Europe of the Roman state or of building up an effective 

MddleAge^ rule of their own. Chlodovech, by his conquests, 
brought a considerable part of the west into a single 
state, the kingdom of the Franks, but he was only a barbarian 
warrior and not an organizer, and after his death there was 
almost constant war and confusion. The predecessors of 
Charlemagne, such as Pippin and Charles Martel, ruled with 
strong hands and restored order, while Charlemagne himself 



ii8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

organized a government for his whole empire. His govern- 
ment, however, broke down completely under his successors, 
and there was another period of disorder, marked by civil wars 
and invasions. So, during most of the five or six centuries 
from the break-down of the Roman empire to the appearance 
of the feudal states, conditions favored the growth of private 
and personal relations at the expense of public authority. . 

Having made out the general nature of the new relations and 
the general causes of their growth, we must examine the prin- 
cipal forms under which they appeared and which were to give 
Three ^'^^^ ^° ^^^ institutions of feudal society. There are 

Essential three essential features: (i) the division of society 

Features of . 

the Feudal mto a Small upper landlord class and the great 
ys em. mass of the laborers, who were tenants and subjects 

of this class; (2) the exercise of public powers and functions by 
local lords instead of by officials of the public government; 
(3) the bond of personal allegiance which bound the smaller 
landlords to the greater and w^hich served as almost the only 
tie to hold together the society of the ruling class. 

I. The division of society into wealthy landlords and poor 

peasants was already familiar in the Roman empire, where the 

small, independent farmer class had almost utterly disappeared, 

and where lands were held in large estates by the 

I. Division 11. ^ ^ 1 1 

of Society Upper class and cultivated by dependent tenants 
Class and ^^ ^^^ slavcs. A similar class of great landlords de- 
c^k^^^t^"*^ veloped among the Germans after the invasions. 
Those tribes which penetrated far within the em- 
pire (like the West Goths or Burgundians) were absorbed in the 
Roman system of landholding; the fortunate and successful 
ones became landed proprietors, the rest sank to the level of 
the Roman tenants. Among the Germans in northern Gaul 
and Germany (like the Franks, Alamanni, Bavarians) a class 
of powerful landlords developed. The kings, the tribal leaders 
and their followers, and the successful warriors, acquired large 
estates from the waste or ownerless lands, as did also by gift 
the churches and monasteries. In the times of violence and 
disorder, the former freemen of the German tribes found it 



FEUDALISM 119 

• safer to live and easier to gain a livelihood by becoming tenants 
on the estates of such landlords or by giving over to them their 
former freeholds and receiving them back as tenant holdings. 
The distinctions between cultivators of different rank and differ- 
ent origin (Roman tenants, Roman slaves, German free farmers) 
lost their meaning; all of the cultivating class was assimilated 
to the one general status, that of tenants on the estates of a 
landlord, subject to his management and control. 

2. Another important feature of the development of the 
feudal system was the exercise of public powers and authority 
by private lords. This was a natural result of the failure of 

an effective government during all these centuries. 
Powers ^^ '^^^ ^^^t "^^^y i^ which this appeared was in the form 
Exercised by of private jurisdiction; that is, the tenants and 
Lords. servants of a landlord obeyed him and looked to 

(a) Private him to settle their disputes, instead of resorting to 
junsdiction. ^j^^ local courts. This practice developed very 
Immunity. rapidly in the Frankish kingdom; in the case of 
s. B., 192, lands held by monasteries it was even legalized by 
R.fi.^yt, 73. ''grants of immunity," charters by which the king 

freed these lands and their inhabitants from the 
control of local officials and the jurisdiction of local courts. 
Secular landlords sometimes secured such grants of immunity; 
more often they simply assumed the right to try the cases and 
control the actions of their peasants and retainers. During 
the centuries that followed, this became so general that the 
pilblic courts of justice virtually disappeared, and law and jus- 
tice for the common man was a matter not of state control 
but of the private authority of his lord. 

It was not only local jurisdiction which passed out of the 
control of the government; even larger public powers tended 

more and more to become matters of private au- 
Powers thority. This, of course, was also a result of the 

Landiori^^ absence of any effective rule during centuries. 

Take, for example, the case of the counts in the 
Frankish kingdom and empire. As we have seen, the count in 
each county was the representative of the king. He controlled 



I20 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the administration of justice in the hundred-courts of his 

county, executed the laws made by the central government, 

and saw to it that the obUgations of serving in the 

Position of 

the Counts army were observed and the taxes and payments 

tion. "^ ^^' ^^^ to the king were paid. Now, when we remem- 

, ber that the counts were great landlords and usu- 

S. B , 195, 196. " 

ally held their office by hereditary right, and 
further that during most of this time, except for the brief 
period of Charlemagne's rule, there was no effective control 
over them from the central government, we can see how they 
would tend to become independent and also how they would 
come to regard these large public powers as being part of 
their personal authority. In the ninth century the Carolingian 
government failed utterly, and the counts became virtually 
independent lords of their counties, exercising in their own 
right such important powers as they had formerly exercised 
in the name of the king or emperor. 

3. The third factor in the development of feudal society was 
the bond of personal allegiance which regulated the relations of 
members of the ruling class to one another. It was an essen- 
tial feature of the holding of land; the smaller 
AlleSSice landlord held his estates from a greater lord, whose 
among the personal authority he recognized and to whom he 
rendered allegiance. The historical process by 
Origin. which this developed is worth tracing. In the 

period after the invasions the Germanic tribal 
kings gave out large tracts of land to their followers and to 
those who served them as agents or officials. These lands be- 
came the hereditary possessions of the holders, but the idea of 
a personal attachment to and a personal dependence upon the 
king persisted. During the Merovingian and Carolingian pe- 
riods such landlords constituted a class bound to the king or 
emperor in a closer relation than that which affected the rest 
of the subjects. 

With the breaking down of the Carolingian empire, classes or 
ranks of lords developed, among whom this personal relationship 
was established. As we have seen, the count became virtually 



FEUDALISM 121 

hereditary lord of the county; the landlords of the county, in- 
stead of being directly bound to the king, were bound to the 
T th L t count, and held their lands from him. Below the 
Caroiingian large landlords of the county a smaller class arose. 

Period 

The retainers and followers of the landlords received 
from him small estates; or former free landowners entered into 
personal dependence on the greater landlord in order to secure 
protection. During this period of violence and confusion, 
when the successors of Charlemagne were almost powerless as 
rulers, a class of lords above that of the counts emerged. To 
resist the attacks of Northmen or Slavs or Hungarians, the 
counts of a whole region, as northern France, or Saxony, or 
Bavaria, combined under the leadership of some powerful 
member of their own class and recognized him as their over- 
lord, paying him personal allegiance and holding their lands 
from him. 

Military service was a regular feature of personal allegiance 
and landholding. After the mass of the freemen had sunk 
into the position of dependent tenants, the duty and privilege 

of fighting became a monopoly of the landholding 
Servic?a class. This was a result partly of the change in 
Feature of the manner of fighting. Since their contact with 

Personal . , . , 

Allegiance the Moorish invaders from Spain, the Franks had 

and Land- ^ j j j ^ j 

holding. come to depend more and more upon mounted 

warriors; after the ninth century most of the fight- 
ing in western Europe was done by horsemen. Warriors were 
drawn necessarily from the class able to equip and maintain 
horses and able to devote their time to fighting. The chief 
service which the follower paid to his lord for the land which 
he held from him was to follow him on horseback to war. 
Lands were held, therefore, in the feudal system on terms of 
personal allegiance and military service to a superior. 

The final step in the formation of a political society based 
on the personal allegiance of the landed aristocracy to their 
immediate superiors was taken when in the main divisions of 
the Caroiingian empire the greatest lords chose one of their own 
number as hereditary leader and king. This step was taken in 



122 . EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

France when, in 987, the last direct Carolingian in the western 
part of the empire died, and the lords chose Hugh, duke of 
Francia (Paris and the region around it), as king of 
Completed; France; it was taken in Germany when Henry, duke 
Head^^^^^ of Saxony, in 919, was recognized by the other 
great dukes as king of Germany. This, in fact, is 
the actual process by which the empire of Charlemagne was 
replaced by the separate kingdoms of medieval history. 

In the preceding paragraphs we have traced the historical 
origin of those grades or ranks of nobles which, in the feudal age, 
were indicated by the titles of nobility. Titles once assumed be- 
came hereditary along with the lands; they differed 
Meaning of in different countries, and included many varieties 
Nobility ^^^ grades. There were, however, four principal 
grades below that of king: namely, duke, count, 
baron, knight. The origin and meaning of these names will 
illustrate the process by which these classes arose. The power- 
ful local landlord, holder of a considerable estate with several 
villages of peasants on it and able to build and defend a castle, 
was the baron (late Latin baro, warrior). He had retainers and 
^, „ followers, some of whom lived at his castle as part 

The Baron. . ^ 

of his household; others of whom held small estates 
from the gift of the baron, for which they paid in military ser- 
vice. These latter are the knights. By derivation the English 
word knight means servant; it suggests the fact that 
this class sprang from the followers of the higher 
noble. The French word for the same class, chevalier, and the 
German, Ritter, mean horseman or rider, and indicate the essen- 
tial duty of the knight, which was attendance on the lord from 
^^ ^ whom he held his small fief. The title count indi- 

The Count. 

cated originally the lord in whose family the former 
public office of governing the county had become hereditary 
and personal, and the one to whom the landlords of the county, 
^, ^ , the barons, paid allegiance. The overlord of the 

The Duke. ^ ,.,,... 

counts, the lord of a large geographical division, 
usually bore the title of duke. This is derived from the Latin 
dux, military leader, suggesting the original function of the 
duke, which was to command the armed forces of his province. 



FEUDALISM 123 

Sometimes, as in France, the leading count who made himself 
head of the larger district by becoming overlord of the counts 
in it, retained his original title, as the count of Flanders, or the 
count of Toulouse. Such counts were on a level with the 
dukes. There are all sorts of intermediate grades and varieties 
of titles, but these four represent the essential classes. 

Summing up the study of the origins of feudalism, it may be 

said in general that it was the natural result of the centuries of 

disorder and weak government following the collapse of the 

Roman empire. The particular tendencies which 

General j i • i . / ^ i 

Cause: were at work durmg these centuries were: (i) the 

Effective" mass of the people ceased to be freemen, and be- 
Pubiic came, as cultivators of the soil, subject completely 

Government. ' ... 

to the landlord class; (2) political authority was 
exercised, not by public officials, but by powerful private lords; 
(3) the strongest bond was not obedience to the government 
but personal allegiance to superiors, this allegiance being regu- 
larly associated with the holding of land and the performance 
of military service. 

It was at the end of the tenth century, after the complete 
collapse of the Carolingian government, that these tendencies 
triumphed so completely as to constitute a new forrii of society. 

This form of society, feudalism, prevailed during 

Extent of , r , , ^. -. i, . . ' , . , 

Feudal the rest of the Middle Age, m the states which grew 

Western^ out of the empire of Charlemagne. It was also 
Europe and carried to England by the Norman conquest, al- 
though the essential elements were already present 
there; it spread to the states which later grew up around the 
old empire of Charlemagne, such as the small Christian king- 
doms in Spain and the kingdoms on the eastern frontier of 
Germany (Bohemia, Poland, and Hungary) ; it was even trans- 
planted for a time into Syria, when the western nobles estab- 
lished states there after the first crusade. 

Having now traced its development, let us study the actual 

Three Aspects Operations of the system. We can best do this by 

of the Feudal examining it in its important aspects: (i) as a form 

of government; (2) as an economic system; and (3) 

as to the manners of life and the culture which characterized it. 



124 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

In the feudal state public government scarcely existed. In 
the first place, authority over men was a personal and private 
affair. Every landlord was virtually the ruler of the peasants 

. who cultivated his lands. The landlord himself 

I. As a 

Form of was bound as vassal by ties of personal allegiance 

to a higher lord. This tie, however, was very dif- 

^MatterVf f^rent from that which bound the peasant to his 

Personal landlord, since the vassal himself was a noble, pos- 

Relations. ^ r ■ ^ ^ 1 A 

sessed of independent power and resources. Ac- 
cording to feudal custom the vassals were subject in certain 
matters to their lords, but a subject who had armed retainers 
and lived in a fortified castle, would be hard to control. And 
if a dispute arose between two nobles they would be more 
likely to fight it out than to submit to the decision of their 
overlord. Private wars of this sort were, in fact, a constant 
feature of the feudal age. 

Law ordinarily was a matter of custom, not enacted by a 
public legislative body nor enforced by public officials. The 
law which regulated the relations of the peasants to one another 
and to their landlord was the local custom of the 
Custom. village. It determined the procedure and the 

amounts of fines and damages in cases arising be- 
tween the villagers; it dealt also with disputes arising between 
the peasants and the landlord as to rents and other obligations. 
The provisions of the law were the outgrowth of local custom 
and differed in different villages. The test of the 
^^anona validity of a particular law was long usage; if the 
question were raised, it was usually settled by taking 
the testimony of the oldest and most respectable inhabitants 
as to what had been the custom within their memory. The 
agent of the landlord administered justice to the peasants ac- 
cording to this customary law in the local court of each village. 
The life of the feudal nobles, as we have seen, was under the 
reign of might rather than the reign of law; never- 
theless, they were more or less subject to "feudal 
law." This was not law in the modern sense; it was the 
body of customs which had grown up out of the conditions of 



FEUDALISM 125 

life in the noble class and the relations among the nobles. 
Now the most important factor in the position of the noble in 
society was his possession of a fief, that is, of a larger or smaller 
territory, held from a greater lord on terms of personal alle- 
giance. Feudal law, therefore, had to do largely with the fief 
and the terms on which it was held. 

The relationship of lesser lords to greater lords, connected 
with the holding of a fief, was known as vassalage. Every 
noble (except the very highest, the feudal king) was the vassal 
Vassala e oi 3i higher lord. The relationship was legally 
established when the vassal performed the act of 
homage and the lord invested him with the fief. 
Homage. rpj^^ usual occasion was the inheritance of a fief by 
s. 8^,209-214. ^]je son of a vassal on his father's death; for the 

R., I, 83, 84, 

85. relationship, in the ordinary course of events, was 

■' ^ * hereditary. In such a case the heir presented him- 

self at the court of his lord and did him homage; that is, knelt 
before him and swore to be faithful to him. Then the lord in- 
vested him with the fief. 

The act of homage and the oath of allegiance constituted a 
promise to perform faithfully the obligations inherent in the 
relation of vassalage. The vassal usually owed his lord mili- 
tary service of an amount and character fixed by 
Implied in custom; for the lower nobility (the knights) this 
Homage. "^'^^ ordinarily forty days' service a year and a 
certain amount of guard duty in the lord's castle. 

Xs.., 1, 87 

The vassal also was bound to appear at his lord's 
court on certain occasions, to give him advice or to add to the 
dignity of his assemblage. Disputes among the vassals were 
supposed to be settled by a court of justice, held at the lord's 
castle and comprising all his vassals; as a matter of fact, such 
disputes were often fought out in private war between the 
opponents. 

The obligations of the vassal to his lord were personal and 
honorable; he did not usually buy his fief or pay rent for it, 
but made his payment in personal services of a dignified sort. 
There were, however, certain Qccg,sions when, according to 



126 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

feudal custom, the lord could demand money from his vassals: 
when the lord was made prisoner in battle the vassals were 

bound to contribute to pay his ransom; when the 
Payments of lord's son was knighted or his daughter married the 
Lord^ *° vassals helped defray the expenses. If the heir to 

the fief were a minor, the lord managed the fief until 

S. B., 215-217. ^ 

O., 38. he came of age; if the fief fell to a woman, the lord's 

Other Powers consent was necessary for her marriage, since her 
Va^saJ^ ^^^'^ husband would become the actual holder and 
vassal. In general, however, we may say that the 
vassal, on being invested with his fief ,» became its lord and the 
ruler of the land and people comprised in it. 

So much for law and authority over persons in the feudal \ 
system. Larger powers, such as the coinage of money, the 
control of highways and rivers, were exercised only by the 
T J. y greater lord, the count or duke, whose fief consti- 

Public tuted a considerable district or province. The 

Powers. 

greatest public powers, taxation, legislation, main- 
taining the peace, were virtually in abeyance. This means 
that the feudal system scarcely constituted a government, in 
the modern sense. The great sovereign powers of a state did 
not exist, smaller public powers were exercised by private lords, 
custom was law, authority over men was a matter of private 
relations. 

In fact, however, this absence of government was never 
complete. That is, there never was a time when the king of 
the feudal state did not try, in some measure, to assert an au- 
thority superior in character to that of the feudal 
Con'fli?^^ lords. The political history of the feudal age, in- 
between deed, is the record of a conflict between the feudal 

Feudal . .... 

Lords and nobiUty, trying to maintam its private sovereignty. 
Sovereignty- ^^^ ^^^ ^^^S trying to Create a royal government 
over his country. How and in what different ways 
this conflict was worked out in the various countries of western 
Europe, we shall study in succeeding chapters. 

The position of the church in the feudal system deserves 
particular notice. By grants from kings and princes, and gifts 



FEUDALISM 127 

of wealthy individuals, the church had acquired immense hold- 
ings of land. As we have seen, landholding in the feudal sys- 
tem carried with it certain powers and certain obligations: the 
landholder must be the vassal of some superior lord from whom 
he received the lands as a fief and to whom he rendered homage 
and allegiance; on the other hand, the landholder was himself 
the overlord of lesser vassals who held fiefs from him, and also 
the landlord of the peasants who cultivated the soil. Since 
this was the only recognized form of landholding, the lands of 
the church had to be fitted into this system. The ruling clergy 
(abbots, bishops, and archbishops) were recognized as the 
responsible lords of the great estates belonging to their mon- 
asteries or churches. As such they were the vassals of the 
king or dukes and were bound to do homage for their fiefs, 
and render either in person or through substitutes the military 
and other services regularly owed by a vassal to his lord. They 
were also great feudal lords, with vassals under them; they 
possessed the sovereign powers and exercised the private juris- 
diction which were the prerogatives of the greater lords. In 
their interests and activities the great ecclesiastics were not 
very different from the dukes and counts. And yet at the 
same time, of course, they were officials in a great international 
religious system; they received their spiritual offices by canon- 
ical election, they were subject to the authority of the pope, 
their essential functions were spiritual and religious. This 
double position of the higher clergy was a source of trouble. 
Their interests were divided and conflicting; bishops and abbots 
were often more occupied with their secular interests than 
with their spiritual. Church offices were sought because of the 
wealth and power attached to them. Moreover, the great 
churchman owed a double allegiance. As a lord he was the 
vassal and subject of the king or duke from whom he held his 
fiefs, and these secular rulers often controlled the ecclesiastical 
elections in order to have their own followers put in control of 
the office. Bishops and abbots were used by the rulers as ad- 
visers and officials in secular government. On the other hand, 
as an ecclesiastic, the great churchman was subject to the 



128 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

authority of the pope from whom he received his spiritual 
powers and whom he was bound to obey. This double alle- 
giance made difficulty, especially when there was a conflict 
between the pope and the secular ruler, and such conflicts were 
frequent from the eleventh century on. Illustrations of this 
occur in later chapters, for example, the "Investiture Conflict " 
and the dispute between Henry II of England and Thomas 
Becket, archbishop of Canterbury. 

In the foregoing paragraphs feudalism has been considered 
in its political aspect, as a form of government. No less impor- 
tant (indeed from the modern view, perhaps, even more im- 
portant) is an understanding of the economic aspect. 

2. As an 1- 1 • f 

Economic For we have come to realize that economic forces 

^^ ^"^ are often more decisive factors in shaping historical 

Based on events than the purely political. The economic 

Agnculture. , . . 

basis of feudal society was agriculture. As we have 
seen, this form of society developed in a time when there was 
almost no commerce or organized industry or city life. The 
wealth of the feudal noble consisted of land, and it was by ex- 
ploiting the agricultural labor of his peasants that the lord 
derived the income necessary to maintain his position and exer- 
cise his powers as a member of the ruling class. 

Let us see what sources of revenue the lord possessed in the 
village. In the first place, the farm lands were cultivated by 
tenants who paid him rent in money or in produce. Then the 

landlord usually had a farm of his own in each vil- 
Revenue of lage, and the work on this was done by some of the 
Re^n^s^^^'^^*^' tenants who were bound by custom to perform such 
Forced labor without pay. The produce which he received 

Market as rents and from his own farms supplied the needs 

rmege. ^^ ^^^ lord's household; the surplus he sold in the 
S. B., 228. Jq(,3^j market. And the lord enjoyed by custom a 

special advantage in disposing of his crops — he had 

the right to sell his grain or wine a certain number of days 

before the peasants could sell theirs, which enabled him to get 

the top price of the market. 

The necessary local industries of the village — the blacksmith- 



FEUDALISM 129 

shop, the mill, the bake-oven, the wine-press — were usually 
established and controlled by the lord. They furnished a con- 
siderable revenue, since the peasants were com- 
Mill%tc!" pelled to use them and to pay for the service. 
The lord frequently let out the smithy or bake-oven 
or mill to one of the peasants for a yearly rent.* If the village 
were a local trading-centre, the lord got an income from the 
market rights, the rents of stalls, and the tolls on roads and at 
the gates of the town. 

The lord also derived an important part of his revenue from 
his right of private jurisdiction. The local court which tried 
the cases of the peasants was established and maintained by 
the lord. The penalties for violations of the cus- 
ViUage'^°°^ tomary law were mostly in the form of fines, which 
Courts. went to the lord. The authority of the lord over 

Restrictions the peasants in other matters yielded him a revenue, 
of Peasant?. The rights of the peasant to marry, to inherit, or 
dispose of his land or other property, were subject 
to restrictions from which he could be relieved by paying a 
customary charge. 

To look after all these complicated rights the lord usually 
had an agent or manager in each village. It was the agent 
who saw to it that the peasants paid their rents and performed 
their enforced labor, and made their other custom- 
the Lord's ary payments to the lord. He was also the judge 
vifage^^^^^ in the local court, and collected, the fines that 
should go to the lord. In fact, the peasants had 
Jittle to do directly with the lord and came in contact with him 
usually only through the local agent. 

So far we have looked at this system from the point of view 
of the landlord; let us now regard it from the peasant's side. 
Not all of the, peasants, it should be noted, were on the same 
level. Some of them occupied a superior position, holding larger 

* The position of village smith or baker or miller was usually handed 
on from father to son, and so produced those familiar family names. 
This is true not only in the EngUsh language, but also in French and 
German. 



I30 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

lands on easier terms and possessing greater personal liberties. 
The great body of peasants, however, was of that peculiar half- 
free, half-slave status which is known as serfdom. 
Peasants They Were not slaves owned by the lord; on the 
were er s. other hand, they were not free to go where they 
th^^s^?^ wished or to dispose of their labor and posses- 
sions. The serf was born into his position; he was 
bound by his birth to cultivate a certain piece of ground, to 
pay certain rents and obligations, and to perform certain labor 
for his lord without pay. He could not sell or leave his land, 
nor hire himself out as a laborer. The most burdensome of his 
obligations, and the one that we may regard as the distinctive 
mark of the servile condition was the necessity of working on 
the lord's own land a certain number of days a week or a year. 
In many cases this amounted to as much as three days a w^eek. 
It is apparent, then, that mediaeval society rested upon a 
foundation of serfdom; upon a system in which the great body 
of the population labored under hard and oppressive conditions, 
without political liberties or political rights. One 
Structure of the most interesting movements -to study in 

Based on -i-« -l • j. • j.i. j i r • 

Inequality. European history is the gradual process of improve- 
c, ment in the condition of the serfs. In the more 

Slow 

Progress progressive western countries, there was a marked 
Equality. improvement within the period of the Middle Age, 
Improvement ^^^ principally to changes in economic conditions. 

in Economic The revival of commerce and industries, with the 
Status. 

consequent growth of towns, offered an outlet to a 
part of the laboring population. Since these towns grew out 
of manors or villages, the original population was made up of 
peasants and serfs of the landlord on whose estates the town 
was located. As the towns increased in population, and the 
industries and trade grew in importance, the inhabitants tended 
to become more independent. The artisans and traders formed 
associations (guilds) and became conscious of their united 
strength. They were able to drive bargains with their lord 
and induce him to relinquish his personal rights over them. 
In many towns, in the twelfth century, the inhabitants, by com- 



FEUDALISM 131 

bining together, were able to secure charters which freed them 
from the lord's jurisdiction and enabled them to set up a gov- 
ernment of their own. Serfs often fled to these towns to escape 
from their hard conditions, and the townsmen resisted the 
attempts of the landlord to recover them by force. In general, 
it came to be a recognized custom that an escaped serf who 
lived in a town "a, year and a day" became a free resident. 
Thus the growth of towns enabled a part of the servile popula- 
tion to acquire the status of freemen. 

Even more important in the breaking-down of serfdom was 
the increase in the use of money, which was greatly hastened 
by the growth of commerce and business. In the early feudal 
age, exchange was largely in the form of barter; the serf paid 
for his piece of land with bodily service and part of his produce. 
With the increase of money as a medium of exchange, the 
landlord sought to turn his rights over lands and tenants into 
a money income; he remitted to the tenants the services and 
restrictions and obligations in return for a money rental. The 
more fortunate serfs were able to acquire the status of free 
tenants, holding their farms for a fixed money rent, and free to 
leave or dispose of them. Some of the serfs became hired 
laborers, working for the landlords for a definite wage, which 
was determined, not by custom but by the "law of supply 
and demand." They approached the status of the free laborer, 
able to dispose of his labor where he could get the best price. 
By the end of the fifteenth century the worst features of serf- 
dom had disappeared in England and France; in more eastern 
countries this advance was made much later.* 

This improvement in the economic condition of the peasant 
class opened the way for that political advance which 
toward IS an important feature of modern democracy. This, 

EquaUty however, is a very recent advance, not yet every- 
where fully achieved. It has aimed at securing 
to all men equality of opportunity, individual liberty, and a 

* The disturbances connected with the transition from serfdom to 
free status are discussed in the chapters on England and France in the 
Hundred Years' War, pp. 376-378. 



132 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

participation in government. At the end of the eighteenth 
century the peasant class was still deprived of these rights, 
and the French Revolution, in insisting on them as the 
*' natural rights of man," started the movement for democracy 
in Europe. 

We have still to look at the cultural aspect of feudalism, for 
that too is necessary for an understanding of mediaeval life. 
Certain features of feudal culture will be discussed in a later 

^g chapter on medieval civilization; we shall consider 

Cultural here those features which are most directly the out- 
growth of feudal conditions, and which may, there- 
fore, serve to throw an additional light on the real character of 
the feudal age. 

Perhaps the most important factor in the life of the feudal 
noble was the fact that he lived in a castle. The essence of the 
castle is the combination of a private fortress and a residence. 
The general reason for the type is to be found, of 
course, in the character of the feudal age: the castle 
was a s)rmbol both of the insecurity of the time and of the inde- 
pendent power of the individual noble. To maintain his in- 
dependence he had to be able to defend himself; possessed of a 
castle, he could hold his own with his equals, lord it over his 
weaker neighbors, and even defy his superiors. 

The principles and methods of construction and plan were 
derived from several sources: from the fortified camp of the 
Roman legions, from the fortified manor-house of the Germanic 
e t chieftain after the invasions, from the intrenched 

Sources of ' 

Castle- camps constructed by the Northmen when they 

landed and harried a region. From these and 
other sources was derived in northern France and England a 
type of castle which we may take as characteristic of the feudal 
residence. This type developed and improved in the course 
of the Middle Age. About the beginning of the twelfth cen- 
tury the builders began to use stone in place of wood for walls 
and towers. At the end of that century the kings and greater 
nobles had developed and organized their revenues so that they 
could build the massive and complicated structures the ruins of 




THE CASTLE OF ARQUES IN NORMAXDY. 

From VioUet-le-Duc, Dtctionnaire raisonne de V architecture franqaise. 

Notice the wide moat with a palisade outside, the approach across drawbridges, the strongly 
defended gateway, the walls with loopholes and battlements and a wide walk around the 
top, and the numerous wall-towers which project beyond the face of the wall. The prin- 
cipal structure is the massive rectangular keep at the farther end of the enclosure; the 
other buildings are of wood — stables, sheds, and lodgings for the garrison. 



FEUDALISM 133 

which still stand to impress us with their strength. In the later 
centuries the improvement in order and peace made the castle 
more of a fine residence and less of a fortress. We may not fol- 
low these changes, but will note the general features of the 
castle as it would appear at the height of the feudal age, around 
1200. 

The castle was built on a site that was easily defendable, 
as a hill or cliff or plateau. The area, of larger or smaller 
extent according to the resources of the builder, was surrounded 
. with high stone walls, very wide at the base and wide 

Features: enough even at the top to allow the besieged, in 
Walls, case of attack, to man the ramparts. At certain 

Moat^^^^'^^' points in its circuit the surrounding wall bulged 
Main Tower out in round towers, giving the defenders command 
of the whole of its surface. Beyond the wall a deep 
moat or ditch was dug around the whole circumference; this 
was sometimes filled with water. Within the walls the princi- 
pal structure, the heart of the castle, was the great tower, called 
in English the "keep," in French the donjon (dungeon). This 
was not placed in the centre of the area but at one corner, usu- 
ally the one most remote from the gateway, and close to the 
outer wall, so that the defenders on the walls could retreat to 
it and so that at the last they could escape by a secret outlet 
in the walls. This tower (which in the older castles was usually 
rectangular, in the later ones frequently round) contained three 
or four stories. The ground floor had no entrance from the 
level of the courtyard, and was occupied by store-rooms and 
cells. The first story above this was the main apartment; it 
contained the lord's hall and private quarters of his family. 
Above were other rooms for members of the household and for 
the guard. Entrance to the tower was gained by an external 
stairway to the main floor, which could be removed in time of 
danger. Entrance could also be gained to an upper story by 
a foot-bridge thrown from the outer wall. 

Approach to the castle was by a single practicable road. 
This led across the moat by a drawbridge, which was kept 
raised in time of danger. The main entrance was through a 



134 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

strong gate-tower, with enormous wooden or iron doors, a fall- 
ing grill or portcullis, and other ingenious barriers. The gate- 
^ ^ tower was occupied at all times by the warder, and 

Entrance. . . ^ •' ' 

in time of danger by a corps of defenders. If a 
surprise attack on the gateway failed, the favorite form of 
assault was by sapping or mining the base of the wall. Mediaeval 
chronicles are full of stories of attack and defense of castles, 
as features of private feuds or wars between princes. 

Such was the ordinary castle of the twelfth century; it must 
have been wanting as a residence in many of the comforts and 
conveniences, to say nothing of the luxuries, of life. In the 
T thirteenth century, when some degree of order had 

Improve- ^ -^ ' '^ 

meats in been introduced into feudal relations, the greater 
lords were able to pay more attention to these 
matters. The most marked improvement was the building of 
a hall apart from the donjon, with larger and more commodious 
quarters, in which the lord and his household lived in peaceful 
times. The finer castles of this sort became the real centres of 
culture and of court life, in which the civilization of the feudal 
age came to flower. 

To illustrate this let us examine one of the actual castles of 
the thirteenth century. It was built by a powerful noble of 
northern France, Lord Enguerrand de Coucy, about 1225. 
Its massive tower, one of the best examples that 
Coucy.'* had survived, was still standing until the spring of 

191 7, when the German army on its retreat from 
this occupied region razed it to the ground. Referring to the 
illustration and description on the opposite page, and com- 
paring it with the rude castle of the eleventh century [oppo- 
site page 132] we can measure the advance, not only in the 
system of defense but also in the arrangements for a lordly 
and dignified life. The immense round tower, built in this case 
so as to dominate the outer court and the entrance, is about 
180 feet high and 100 feet in diameter. It contains, including 
a sunken ground floor, four stories and is large enough to house 
a garrison in time of siege. Quite at the opposite end, how- 
ever, is a structure built into the outer wall, with two stories 



/ 














THE CASTLE OF COUCY, ABOUT 1225. 

From VioUet-le-Duc, Diclionnaire raisonne de V architecture franqaise. 

Notice the lower wall which surrounds an outer court, and the elaborately protected bridge 
over the moat. A, the great tower or donjon; just beyond is seen the east end of the 
chapel; B, the large hall used for assemblies; C, the dwelling of the lord and his household. 



FEUDALISM 135 

above the ground floor, containing the more commodious quar- 
ters for the lord and his household in ordinary times; its large 
windows and wide veranda open onto the courtyard, and a 
fine winding stairway enclosed in a tower gives access to the 
apartments. All along one side of the courtyard extends the 
great hall, whose upper story is a vast assembly-room where 
the lord holds his feudal court and council with his vassals. 
Projecting into the courtyard from this side is the fine Gothic 
chapel. The castle of Coucy was not only a powerful fortress; 
it was also a courtly residence and the political centre of a 
great landed domain. 

Fighting occupied a large share of the time and interest of 

,the feudal noble. The battles of the feudal age were fought 

mainly by knights in armor and on horseback; the infantry in 

the form of pikemen, crossbowmen, and archers, 

Feud 3.1 

Warfare. played a subordinate role. The armor of the noble 
Armor warrior, before the thirteenth century, was mainly 

of chain mail; that is, of links of iron or steel, 
welded together to form coat and leggings. The head was cov- 
ered with an iron or steel helmet. Exposed parts (the shoulders, 
breast, elbows, knees) were often protected by plates of iron or 
steel fastened onto the chain mail. In time these developed 
into the ''plate armor," in which the whole body was encased 
in jointed plates of iron or steel. The simpler chain mail of 
^, . , , earlier times passed out of use, and most of the 

Shield. . ^ 

specimens of armor now preserved in museums and 
family collections are of the later sort. As an additional de- 
fense the knight carried a long, narrow shield on his left arm, 
which he could swing around to cover his body crouched on the 
horse for the charge. (The term ''squire," in French ecuyer, 
commonly used for a lower rank of nobles, had its origin in the 
fact that the follower or attendant of the knight carried the 
shield {ecu) and handed it to him when the battle began.) 

The weapons of attack were the long lance, with 

which the knight charged at his enemy, and the 
sword, swung at his left side by a girdle. The sword was the 
nobler weapon, and the one upon which the warrior most de- 



136 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

pended; for when, as usually happened, the lances were shat- 
tered in the charge, the combatants drew their heavy swords 
and hewed at one another in close, hand-to-hand combat. 

The customs of the feudal age which give to it its pictur- 
esqueness and romance are very largely connected with fight- 
ing. Tournaments developed out of mock combats and trials 
of skill which were part of the training of the young 
Customs: noble. The ceremony of knighting, which became 
Tourna- go elaborate in the later age, had its origin in the 

Knighthood, practice of conferring arms and armor upon the 
etc ^ ^^' young noble when he came of age and was prepared 
to participate in what that period and society con- 
sidered the serious business of life. Heraldry probably devel- 
oped from the practice of painting or fastening a design on the 
face of the shield; such marks served to distinguish knights 
from one another when they were hidden by helmet and armor. 
They were handed on from father to son and became family 
** coats of arms." 

Not only the customs but the virtues and manners of the 
noble were largely those of a warrior class. Personal strength 
and skill in arms, bravery, and a strong sense of personal worth 
and honor were the most highly prized virtues. 
CWvalry. Gentler qualities held in esteem were fidelity to the 
pledged word, courtesy to equals, and respect for 
women (though the last was confined to women of the noble 
class, and was more apparent in the romantic literature of the 
age than in the practice of the nobles). The combination of 
these qualities constitutes what we call "chivalry." They had 
their defects: strength and courage might appear as brutality, 
the sense of personal honor as quarrelsomeness and arrogance. 
Nevertheless, the feudal age has bequeathed to modern times 
two fine conceptions: namely, romance and chivalry, without 
which our own civilization would be much poorer. 

By its demands and the ability to pay for having its demands 
supplied feudal society fostered many important arts. Chief 
of these was architecture; in the development of that art the 
building of feudal castles stands close in importance to the build- 




SECTION OF THE BAYEUX TAPESTRY. 

The Bayeux Tapestry was made to record the Norman invasion of England of 1066. It is 
attributed to Matilda, wife of William the Conqueror. Note the chain-mail armor, the 
simple form of the helmet, the long triangular shield. This represents an early stage of 
arms and armor. 





EFFIGY OF AN ENG- 



LISH NOBLE. 

From a tombstone dated 

1277. 



WARRIOR KNEELING. 



Illustration of a manuscript. Note the coat of mail 
with sleeves, hand-covering and hood all of one piece, 
and the more elaborate helmet lying on the ground. 
The legs are given additional protection by what ap- 
pear to be leather guards studded with metal rings. The cloth coat over the coat of mail is 
decorated with the same design as the pennant; this is the " arms," or armoriai design, of the 
knight. 

From Qtncheral, Histoire de Costume en France. 



FEUDALISM 137 

ing of cathedrals. To supply his material needs the feudal noble 
required the work of the smith, the cabinet-maker, the carver, 
the weaver, and the dyer; and these artisans pro- 
Crafts of the duced for him beautiful specimens of their handi- 
Feudal Age. ^^^y^^ ^^^^ ^f ^^jch are still preserved— steel blades 
and armor, carved furniture, tapestries, and gorgeous cloths. 
The books he owned were few, but the work of adorning them 
with colored drawings had a considerable part in the develop- 
ment of modern art. 

One of the chief contributions of feudal society to the body 

of culture which we have inherited was the literature produced 

by poets to satisfy the intellectual and spiritual needs of the 

, noble class. The favorite type was the long narra- 

Literature of . . , , i i • j j 

the Feudal tive poem, recitmg the adventures and heroic deeds 
^^^' of legendary figures, such as Roland and the other 

warriors of Charlemagne's army. King Arthur and his knights, 
and the Greek and Trojan heroes of the Trojan war. The 
poets pictured these legendary heroes as feudal nobles of their 
own age, and embellished their stories with incidents and de- 
scriptions which would appeal to their noble audiences. The 
type of Hterature which we call the romance was very largely 
the product of this literary movement of the feudal age. 

In summing up the discussion of feudalism as a historical 
movement, we may say that it was essentially a makeshift. 
In the period between the collapse of the public government of 
the Roman empire and the formation of the strong 
Trani'o^'' national monarchies of the later Middle Age, society 
Societ^^ grouped itself about private leaders of the land- 

holding class. It served an important purpose, how- 
ever, in holding men together in some sort of order during this 
period of transition, and it left indelible marks on the later Ufe 
of western European peoples. Changing conditions in the later 
Middle Age deprived it of its dominating position 
UsDecuL. in government and society. The relative impor- 
tance of the feudal noble steadily declined before the 
growth of public royal governments, which took from him his 
political supremacy; before the growth of cities and of a power- 



138 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ful middle class of traders, manufacturers, and bankers, which 
deprived him of his economic supremacy; before the develop- 
ment of national armies equipped with firearms, which deprived 
him of his military supremacy. To the development of these 
new forces feudalism stood as a barrier which was doomed to 
be swept away. 

While feudalism as a system passed away, it left on European 
society an imprint which is easily recognized to-day. Noble 
titles are still used and imply a superior position in the social 
Survivals of scale, not only above that of the common people 
Feudal but above that also of the wealthy and influential 

Elements m . , • , ^ i e 

Modern class of merchants and capitalists. Members of 

^^^ ^ the aristocracy affect an attitude of superiority 

toward those engaged in "trade." This attitude, it may be 
noticed, is much less general in England to-day than it was in 
the age of Thackeray. Lands are still held in the form of large 
estates, belonging to the titled class and cultivated by tenants, 
whose rents furnish the revenues of their lords. The military 
character of feudal society has been transmitted to modern 
times to a certain extent. In the period before the French 
Revolution, the armies were officered entirely by members of 
the titled class; and even in recent times, when armies are based 
on the duty of every citizen to serve, the officers are largely 
drawn from that class because of its traditions. Hence the 
"militaristic" sentiment, the belief in war as a noble pursuit, is 
a survival of feudal ideals. 



CHAPTER VIII 
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 

The papacy can boast of being the oldest institution of 
Europe. Beginning with St. Peter and including the present 
pope, Benedict XV, it counts an unbroken line of two hundred 
J and sixty-five rulers, some of them the most re- 

of the markable men of their age. At one time the bishop 

of Rome was (and still is for the Catholic world) 
the supreme authority in all matters pertaining to doctrine and 
morals. Even kings and emperors have humbled themselves 
before him and done penance at his command. As early as 
the sixth century he was already a temporal ruler, being really, 
if not technically, the lord and governor of Rome and the terri- 
tory immediately about it. This position he held for about 
thirteen hundred years, losing it only in 1870, when the Italians 
took Rome by force and made it the capital of united Italy. 
For some hundreds of years he was, or strove to be, the over- 
lord of all Christian countries, claiming the divine right to 
dispose of crowns and kingdoms, to make and unmake em- 
perors, and to dictate in matters of government in each coun- 
try. As a consequence of this, he was an international, or 
rather "supernational," political power in Europe, interfering 
at will in the internal as well as in the external affairs of every 
nation. So completely was the world subject to papal domina- 
tion during the Middle Age that a knowledge of papal history 
is .necessary for understanding the period. 

We must at the outset have a clear idea of the various offices 
and powers which the pope has at different times held. On the 
spiritual side he is (i) the bishop of Rome, and exercises his 
episcopal authority in his diocese as any other bishop does. 
(2) He has the position of an archbishop, having six (for- 

139 



I40 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

merly seven) suffragan bishops under him. (3) He was also for 
a while called patriarch. (4) He is also the universal bishop, 
Sixfold having the whole world for his diocese, and possess- 

Office of ing authority superior to that of the local bishop. 

the Pope. / f . 1 . 1 1 1 

(5} As to nis temporal power, he was the sover- 
eign of Rome and the territory about it (the so-called papal 
states), governing it in his own right (to 1870). (6) Lastly, he 
was the lord of the whole Christian world, responsible to God 
for the good government of it, with the right and duty to con- 
trol all temporal rulers and to depose all those who did not 
govern in a Christian manner. It must not, however, be sup- 
posed that the bishop of Rome from the first exercised all these 
powers. On the contrary, his claims were developed slowly, 
and often encountered stubborn resistance. In fact, the Greek 
part of the church never recognized the bishop of Rome as the 
bishop of the whole church, and the chief governments of 
Europe resisted the papal claims to temporal sovereignty over 
them, and submitted only when the force of circumstances 
compelled them to do so. 

By way of introduction, as well as to explain the character 
and origin of the first three offices named, a brief account of 
the way in which the government of the church was developed 

is here in place. During the first three centuries 
Churches. of the existence of the church, an increasing honor 
R 18 10 ^^^ attached to the bishops of those congregations 

which had been founded by an apostle. Chief of 
these "apostolic" churches were those of Jerusalem, Antioch, 
Ephesus, Caesarea, Corinth, Rome, and Alexandria, whose 
church was believed to have been founded by St. Mark the 
, . „ Evangelist, the companion of St. Peter. The chief 

reason of their importance and honor was the fact 
that the successive bishops of such a church were supposed to 
have preserved in a pure form the ''tradition," that is, the oral 
teachings, of the apostle who had preached there. The high 
rank of the bishops of these cities, however, rested on senti- 
ment and was not fixed by any ofiS.cial action. 
This so-called "apostolic" principle was an impracticable as 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 141 

well as an inadequate basis on which to build a great institu- 
tion, such as the government of the church was, and conse- 
Organization Qu^iitly the advancing organization of the church 
of Church during the fourth century was carried out on a dif- 

FOIIOWS r 1 T 1 . . . . 

Organization ferent plan. In workmg out its organization — a 
o mpire. pj-Qcess which lasted some centuries — the church 
naturally used the government of the empire as its model. 
That is, the earliest ecclesiastical divisions coincided with ex- 
isting political divisions, and the rank of an ecclesiastic was de- 
termined by the political rank of his city. There was the same 
lack of system, therefore, in the organization of the church as 
was found in that of the empire. Diocletian introduced system 
into the political organization by dividing the whole empire 
into four prefectures, each prefecture into a number of dioceses, 
_, , . , and each diocese into a number of provinces. This 

Patriarch, ^ ^ 

Archbishop, organization the church adopted in some degree of 
completeness only in the prefecture of the east; at 
the head of each of its five dioceses (whose capitals were 
Antioch, Alexandria, Ephesus, Csesarea, and Heraclea) there 
was an ecclesiastical head, called a patriarch; over each 
of the provinces of these dioceses there was an archbishop (also 
called metropolitan), and over each city there was a bishop. 
In the east, therefore, where the organization of the church 
had gone farthest, the offices in the order of their rank in an 
ascending scale were parish priest, bishop, archbishop (metro- 
politan) , and patriarch. There the church made no 

No Patriarch 

in the West attempt to develop an official over the whole pre- 
Rome.^* fecture, who should be superior to the patriarchs. 
In the other three prefectures of the empire the 
ecclesiastical organization was not completed on 
these lines. There the chief bishop of each province came to 
be an archbishop, but no ecclesiastical head corresponding to 
the patriarch in the east was developed over the dioceses, ex- 
cept, of course, in that of Italy. This may be explained (i) 
by the fact that the dioceses of the west did not generally have 
as capitals large and ancient cities, such as Ephesus, Antioch, 
and Alexandria were. (2) Nor could the churches of the cities 



142 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

in the west boast that they had been founded by apostles. (3) 
The organization of the church in the west was arrested by the in- 
vasions of the barbarians and other serious poHtical disturbances. 
(4) And the bishop of Rome early put forth the 
claim to ecclesiastical supremacy, and was able to 
overcome the "patriarchal" aspirations of all other bishops. 
Consequently, no other patriarch was developed in the west. 
There the offices in the order of their rank were parish priest, 
bishop, archbishop (metropolitan), and pope.* 

As local bishop, archbishop, and patriarch, the bishop of 
Rome does not differ in any respect from other bishops, arch- 
bishops, and patriarchs. We may therefore proceed at once 
to discuss the manner in which he became universal 
^ ' bishop, with the whole world for his diocese. The 
R., 20, 22, claim of the bishop of Rome to the supreme head- 
ship of the church, as it became more and more 
clearly defined, met with increasing opposition. It is an ad- 
mitted fact that the bishop of Rome never actually exercised 
any real authority over the church in the east. It is equally 
certain that his authority was not from the first recognized in 
all the west. The more distant archbishops and bishops, and 
even some of the archbishops of Italy (Ravenna, Milan, Aqui- 
leia), continued for some centuries to maintain their inde- 
pendence of Rome, and acted to all intents and purposes as 
patriarchs, though not possessing that title. After a long 
struggle, however, the bishop of Rome came out victorious, and 
was accepted throughout the west as the head of the church. 

To this victory certain factors contributed materially, though 
in various degrees, (i) Rome had an important advantage 

* Although the title " patriarch " did not secure a fixed place in the 
scale of offices in the Catholic church, it is not unknown there. In accor- 
dance with its historical origin, its holder outranks archbishops. There 
are at present ten patriarchates: Venice, Lisbon, Alexandria, Antioch, 
Jerusalem, Constantinople, Cilicla, the East Indies, the West Indies, 
and Babylon. The bishop of Rome ceased to call himself patriarch 
because that name seemed to put him on the same plane as the other 
patriarchs. He adopted the title of pope (a Greek word meaning 
father) and, in order that it might indicate his unique position, he ap- 
propriated it to his exclusive use. 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 143 

over all other capitals of dioceses in that it had been the capital 
of the empire and the chief city of the west. Its 

o?Rome^ ancient rank no doubt still had some influence on 
the minds of men, and caused greater honor to be 

paid to its bishop than to any other ecclesiastic in the west. 

(2) During the persecutions as well as during the invasions 
of the barbarians, the bishop of Rome zealously interfered on 
P Aid behalf of all the oppressed, and generously contrib- 
the uted money to the relief of the distressed. Every- 

Distressed 

where in the west he boldly interceded with bar- 
barian kings on behalf of the conquered and suffering orthodox 
provincials, whose grateful affection he thereby won. 

(3) He was especially fortunate in being the only patriarch 
Th o 1 ^^ ^^^ WGst except that of Venice. Certain other 
Patriarch in bishops and archbishoDS held for a time an inde- 

the West . . 

pendent position, but they had no special title 
which indicated or justified their independence. 

(4) During the long and intricate theological discussions 

(300-800), the bishop of Rome was always on that 
Orthodox. ^^^^ ^^ every question which eventually came to be 

regarded as orthodox. He could therefore con- 
vincingly point to his record, and declare that the Roman 
church had never erred.* 

(5) The legislation of some of the great church councilsf led 
the bishop of Rome to assert his headship of the whole church 
more vigorously than ever, basing his claim on what is called 
the Petrine theory. Because Constantinople had become the 

* It is frequently said that the council of Sardica (now Sofia, in 
Bulgaria), 343, recognized the pope as the supreme head of the church 
by enacting that appeals might be made to him. This council was, 
in fact, attended only by westerners, and its decrees were never ac~ 
cepted by the Greeks. It enacted that any bishop who felt that he had 
been wrongfully deposed might appeal to Julian (who was then bishop 
of Rome), who might either ratify the deposition or summon a new 
council for the purpose of rehearing the case. 

t The councils of Nicaea, 325, Constantinople, 381, Ephesus, 431, Chal- 
cedon, 451, Constantinople, 553, Constantinople, 680, and Nicaea, 787, 
are known as the seven ecumenical (i. e., universal) councils, whose 
decrees are accepted by Greeks, Roman Catholics, and Protestants 
alike. 



144 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

residence of one of the emperors, the council which was held 
there in 381, acting on the principle that the political rank of a 

city determined the ecclesiastical rank of its bishop, 
Coundis. made the bishop of Constantinople a patriarch. It 

further enacted that because Rome was the an- 
cient capital, and therefore more honorable, its patriarch should 
have the first place of honor; and that because Constantinople 
was the younger capital its patriarch should have the second 
place of honor. The council of Chalcedon, however, in 451 de- 
creed that because Rome and Constantinople were the two 
capitals of the empire their patriarchs should have the same 
rank and honor, and should be equal in position, power, and 
authority, and should enjoy the same degree of superiority 
over all the other clergy. 

To this action of the council Leo the Great (440-461), who 
was then bishop of Rome, objected. He refused to recognize 
the patriarch of Constantinople as his equal in authority, and 

declared that the fact that Rome was a capital of 

The Petrine • i i i • 1 i • 1 i • 

Theory. the empire had nothmg whatever to do with his 

S B^ 25. supremacy over the church. Freely admitting that 
0., 10. Constantinople was one of the capitals of the em- 

pire, he declared that not the political rank of a 
city but the apostolic origin of its church determined the 
ecclesiastical rank of its bishop. Accordingly, the bishops of 
churches which had been founded by apostles enjoyed a higher 
rank than all other bishops. And of all the churches founded 
by apostles, that of Rome was supreme, because St. Peter, the 
prince of the apostles, had not only established it but had also 
been its first bishop; and, although he had established other 
congregations, he had been bishop in Rome, and had attached 
all his rights, dignity, and supremacy to the office of bishop of 
Rome in such a way that all his successors in that office in- 
herited them, and thus became rulers of the whole church and 
endued with supreme power over it.* 

* The supremacy of St. Peter is based on the words of Jesus to him: 
"Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the 
gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee 
the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 145 

The east, however, refused to accept this theory, and it is 
still one of the chief differences between the Greek and Roman 
churches. Even in the west Leo's authority was at that time 
far from being everywhere recognized. The Germans, who had 
taken possession of nearly all the west, were heretics and of 
course refused to acknowledge the pope's authority over them. 
In this way his influence had been destroyed in Africa by the 
Vandals, in Spain and southern Gaul by the West Goths and 
Suevi, and in the Rhone valley by the Burgundians. And his 
position was to become even worse, for a few years later the 
East Goths took possession of a large part of Italy (488-553), 
and they were followed by the Lombards (568-774), a still 
more vigorous people, who were not only heretics but, in their 
ambition to rule all Italy, made war on the pope and threatened 
to deprive him of the city of Rome and of all his lands. The 
permanent establishment of a Lombard kingdom with its cap- 
ital at Rome would have made impossible the development of 
the medieval papacy as we know it. 

From this critical situation the papacy was rescued by a 
broad and energetic mission work, coupled with a few events 
which, in their nature, seemed accidental. Among the latter 
The Pope ^^y ^^ classed the conversion of the Franks to the 
Won the orthodox faith. In 406 Chlodovech, king of the 

West by ^ 7 . . 

Mission Franks, accepted the orthodox form of Christianity, 

and soon set himself to destroy his heretical neigh- 
bors. By driving the West Goths over the Pyrenees and con- 
quering the Burgundians he made all Gaul orthodox. Thanks 
to the persistent efforts of the pope and the Catholic clergy, the 
West Goths in Spain and the Lombards in Italy were gradually 
converted from their heresy and brought into subjection to the 
pope. A most important step was taken in 596, when Gregory I 

earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on 
earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16 : 18/.). This passage was 
further reinforced by the words: " Feed my sheep " (John2i : 15^.), and 
"When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren" (Luke 22:32). 
From these and similar passages Leo inferred that to Peter was com- 
mitted the supreme power over the church. The keys, which symbol- 
ized this supreme authority, had been intrusted to him in a special 
manner. 



146 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

sent St. Augustine with some forty monks as missionaries to the 
pagan Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, who had taken possession of 
St Au u t'ne -^^i^^i^* Since they were Roman monks sent out 
and the as missionaries by the bishop of Rome, they car- 

ried with them as a part of their faith the Petrine 
o.,^o' ^^ theory of the universal supremacy of the pope. 

R-. 27-31, They landed in Kent, whose king received them 
39-42. . 

kmdly and gave them permission to establish 

themselves in Canterbury. They met with success and soon 
extended their labors beyond the boundaries of Kent. Before 
the end of the seventh century all the little kingdoms of Angles 
and Saxons had accepted Christianity, and with it the tenet of 
papal supremacy. Roman Catholic England then furnished 
the man who was to reorganize the church among the Franks, 
to convert the more distant tribes, which had still remained in- 
dependent and heathen, and to establish the authority of the 
pope over all Frankland. This was the work of Boniface. 

Winfred, or Boniface, as he is generally called, was a West 
Saxon, born toward the end of the seventh century. He be- 
came a Benedictine monk and chose to become a missionary 
Boniface and 2,mong the Franks. Although they had been 
the Germans, nominally converted, Boniface in his letters gives 
s. B., 40. a gloomy picture of the state of their religion and 

'' ^^ ^^' morals. Heathen beliefs and practices were mingled 
with their Christianity, and the clergy were ignorant and un- 
disciplined. Worse than that in his eyes was the fact that they 
did not recognize the headship of the pope. Boniface carried 
with him as an article of his faith the tenet of papal supremacy, 
and this he taught to the Franks and to all the tribes which 
he converted. He visited Rome several times and secured the 
papal blessing on his work. The pope, perceiving the immense 
advantages which he might derive from the work of Boniface, 
made him a missionary bishop to the Germans, and showed 
that he regarded Germany as his diocese by requiring Boniface 
to take the same oath of obedience and faithfulness to him as 
he required of the bishops in the diocese of Rome. With the 
support of the Frankish government Boniface overcame the 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 147 

difficulties in his way. He reformed the church in all the king- 
dom of the Franks, and completed its organization by the estab- 
lishment of new bishoprics (Wuerzburg, Erfurt, Buraburg near 
Fritzlar). Boniface himself was made archbishop of Mainz. 
So well did he do his work that he deserved to be called the 
apostle of Germany. His missionary zeal led him to resign 
his archbishopric in 753 and to go with a large number of help- 
ers as a missionary to the Frisians, at whose hands he met a 
martyr's death (754). The far-reaching effects of his work 
could not then be foreseen, but it resulted in the subjection of 
the west to papal authority. For it was from this church of 
Germany, now thoroughly dependent on the pope and holding 
to the dogma of his headship of the church, that Christianity 
was to be carried to the remaining German tribes (such as the 
Saxons and Scandinavians), and to the Slavic peoples east of 
the Germans. Unfortunately for the papacy, missionaries of 
the Greek church found their way among the Russians, and 
thereby set a limit to the extension of the papal church toward 
the east. But the west now acknowledged the supremacy of 
the pope. It was his by right of a bloodless conquest that re- 
flects great honor on him and his devoted missionaries. It re- 
mained only for him to confirm his possession of it, and Gregory 
VII (1073-1085) did this by means of his legates. 

The increasing separation of the clergy from the laity and 
their development into a priestly class had some influence on 
the growth of the ecclesiastical power of the pope, for it gave 
Sacerdotal ^^^ ^^ Opportunity to put himself at the head of 
Character the clcrgy. The sacerdotal character of the clergy 
was the basis for their separation from the laity. 
All clergymen by their ordination received the priestly or 
sacerdotal character which expressed itself in their dress, their 
higher morals, and their manner of living; and, most important 
of all, it gave them the exclusive right and power to administer 
the sacraments. Now, it seemed to them that, possessing this 
priestly character and being intrusted with the administration 
of divine things, they ought to be exempt from the laws gov- 
erning ordinary men. So for some centuries the clergy worked 



148 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

to secure privileges for themselves as a class and finally to free 
themselves entirely from the authority of the state. Their 
desire to escape from all secular control was probably increased 
by the fact that the emperor attempted to dictate the creed, 
that he made and deposed bishops, and that even the heretical 
kings of the Germans (East Goths, West Goths, Burgundians, 
Lombards) did the same. The clergy had very early been 
freed from taxes and certain public duties which were burden- 
some. Then they sought to be freed from the law 
Fre^efrom^ of the State, declaring that only the clergy were 
sSte°^ ^^^ competent to sit in judgment on the clergy, and 
demanding that all clergymen who were accused of 
a crime should be tried by their fellow clergymen and not by 
laymen. In this they were successful, and so the clergy came 
to form "a state within a state." They became, in fact, a 
great international state or organization, with the pope at their 
head. They were subject neither to the king nor to the law 
of the land in which they lived, but they naturally looked to 
the pope as their ruler, and in all struggles with the secular 
government they sought his aid.* 

In order to understand the origin of the temporal power of 
the pope it is necessary to begin with the relation between the 
state and religion in the Roman empire. According to Roman 
principles (both republican and imperial), religion and its min- 

* This desire to free themselves from the law of the state led to a 

series of forgeries which culminated in the famous collection known 
as the Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals. The collection consists of some 
three hundred documents (chiefly acts of councils, letters, and decrees 
of popes, ranging from the fourth pope, Clement I, to the sixty-sixth, 
Gregory the Great, 590-604), many of which are spurious. The chief 
purpose of most of these forgeries was to show that the law of the 
church, as found in the decrees of both popes and councils, was superior 
to the law of the state, and that the clergy were subject only to the law 
of the church; anathema and excommunication should fall on all who 
violated the law of the church, and where the two bodies of law con- 
flicted, that of the church always had the precedence. All this tended 
to the establishment of ecclesiastical courts and the formation of a 
body of law (canon law) applicable only to the clergy. In time a large 
body of ecclesiastical law was developed (canon law, corpus juris 
canonici) by which the clergy were governed. 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 149 

isters were under the control of the government. Rome had 
a state religion, and all priests were state officials. When 
The Roman Constantine made the practice of Christianity legal 
cSi?rdled he took the same attitude toward the new religion 
ReUgion. ^^^^ j^g j^^^ j^^^j toward the old. He and his 
S. B,, 37, 38. successors assumed authority over the church and 
the clergy; they called the church councils, presided over them, 
and made their decrees valid by imperial sanction. They con- 
trolled and confirmed the election of bishops, and deposed 
them at pleasure. Even the bishop of Rome was not an 
exception to this rule, for he could not be consecrated un- 
til his election had been confirmed by the emperor, and in 
the sixth and seventh centuries the emperors deposed and 
punished various popes who refused to obey them.* Some 
of the emperors attempted to dictate even in matters of doc- 
trine. In a word, Christianity was the state religion and the 
Christian clergy were officials of the state. 

Since the clergy were officials of the state, the emperor felt 
that he had a right to their services in other than ecclesiastical 
matters. Relying on the uprightness and fairness of the clergy, 
Emperors ^^^ empcrors intrusted them, especially the bishops. 
Used the -^jth an Oversight over various secular officials and 

Clergy in 

Secular matters. In the midst of the violence of the times 

(350-600) the emperor gladly made use of the 
clergy to assist in the preservation of order and in the admin- 
istration of justice. At the same time, in the general paralysis 
or destruction of government which was caused by the invasions 
of the barbarians (375-600), the clergy were confronted with 
the duty of resisting the violence of the invaders and of per- 
forming the functions of the civil government. The bishops 
did not shrink from these new and important duties which cir- 
cumstances thrust upon them, but met them in a commendable 
spirit of helpfulness and self-sacrifice. They justified their 

* Thus Justinian I (527-565) deposed Pope Vigllius (537-555), and 
exiled him because he (with some hesitation) refused to accept the im- 
perial statement of a certain doctrine. For a Hke reason Constans II 
seized the pope Martin I (649-655), and deposed and exiled him (653). 



ISO EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

exercise of secular functions by declaring that their office bound 
them to protect the weak and defenseless, and to prevent in- 
justice and oppression. So by the end of the sixth century the 
bishops throughout the west were performing certain secular 
functions, assumed sometimes at the command of the emperor, 
but more often under the pressure of circumstances. 

This, which is true of bishops in general in the west, is es- 
pecially true of the bishop of Rome, and may be regarded as 
one of the roots from which sprang his temporal sovereignty. 
It had another root also in the power which the 
Landlord^ ^^ pope exercised as a great landlord. In 321 Con- 
stantine issued a decree giving the Christian church 
the right to hold property. From that time the bishop of Rome 
as the representative of St. Peter received large and numerous 
gifts of land, chiefly from the emperors and from rich and noble 
^j^g families. All these lands taken together were known 

Patrimony as the " patrimony* of St. Peter." It was also popu- 
larly called the ^'possession of the poor," and the 
popes managed it in a manner worthy of the purpose for which 
it had been given to St. Peter. They were solicitous that the 
serfs and slaves who tilled it should neither be overworked nor 
harshly dealt with, and that they should not be oppressed by 
the exorbitant demands of the papal overseers. The large in- 
come from the patrimony was wisely spent. f Now, since the 

* After 600 this patrimony was not materially enlarged by further 
gifts, because (i) the liberality of the emperors, who lived then in the 
east, ceased entirely, and (2) the rich families of Italy had been either 
ruined or destroyed by wars and the invasions of the barbarians, 
especially of the Lombards. The lands of the patrimony were widely 
scattered; they were found in all parts of Italy and in the neighboring 
islands, in Gaul, in Africa, in Dalmatia, and even in the Greek part 
of the empire. For the purpose of managing them they were united 
into groups: a number of farms (fundi) formed a massa, and a number of 
masscB were called a patrimony, and designated by the name of the 
province in which the lands were situated. The patrimony of Sicily was 
probably the richest of all because of the great quantities of grain 
which it produced, while the patrimony of southern Italy was important 
for its forests, which supplied the popes with building-materials, 

t (i) A part of it went to support the papal household, the clergy, 
and the officials who managed the patrimony. (2) The popes used 
some of it to keep churches in repair and to build new ones, to found 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 151 

pope was dependent on the patrimony for means to carry on 
the work of the church, he was deeply and directly interested 
in everything that concerned it. Everything that 
People Have affected the patrimony affected him, and all who 
inteiSts ^G^Q in any way dependent on him. On this ac- 
count there grew up a community of interest be- 
tween the pope and the people of all the provinces in which 
he had large possessions.* 

and support monasteries, hospitals, orphan asylums, hospices for pil- 
grims and travellers, and homes for the poor. (3) Some of it they 
used for the purchase of freedom for Christian slaves, and for the ran- 
som of prisoners of war. (4) And lastly, they had to expend a consid- 
erable part of it in feeding the people of Rome, who had been pauper- 
ized by the free distribution of grain by the emperors and rich Romans. 
In this important respect the pope early took the place of the emperor, 
and probably nothing else that he did brought him greater popularity 
in Rome, 

* The growth of this feeling of solidarity between the pope and the 
people of Italy, and his consequent representation of them in political 
matters may be traced in the following incidents — a few selected from 
the many. Since there was no emperor in Rome (after 476 there was 
none in Italy) when the barbarians invaded Italy, both because of his 
landed Interests and his ecclesiastical position it fell to him to represent 
the people against the invaders. When Alaric besieged Rome (410) 
the pope acted as the intermediary between him and the emperor, who 
was living in Ravenna. Leo I is said to have met Attila and turned 
him back from Rome, and it is certain that by his entreaties he miti- 
gated to some extent the ferocity of the Vandals when they sacked 
Rome (455). During the rule of the East Goths In Italy the pope 
frequently appeared before Theodorlc the Great In Ravenna to present 
appeals, or to represent the Interests of the people of various parts of 
Italy, and he excused himself to Theodorlc for mingling in secular 
matters by declaring that It was the duty of his office to champion the 
cause of the weak and oppressed. When the emperor was persecuting 
the Arians In the east Theodorlc used the pope as his ambassador to 
the emperor to demand that he accord the Arians better treatment. 
A few years later Theodohat, king of the East Goths, sent the pope to 
Constantinople to beg the emperor to cease from his war against the 
Q -g ^ East Goths. Justinian, in the pragmatic sanction by 

which he regulated the affairs of Italy (554), recognized 
the high position of the pope and of bishops In general, and assigned 
them definite secular duties. He gave all bishops a voice In the election 
of officials, with the authority to oversee their conduct in office. And 
he also deposited standard weights and measures with the pope and 
commanded him in conjunction with the senate to see that these were 
used throughout Italy. ^. 



152 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Because of this solidarity between the pope and the people 
of Rome his secular duties and political activity rapidly in- 
creased after the Lombards entered Italy (568). He acted as 

the intermediary between the emperor and the 
Improves All cxarch OR the one hand and the Lombards on the 
2^?°''^'''"" other. Rome itself was in danger, and Gregory I 

was compelled to take upon himself the defense of 
the city. He begged both the emperor and the exarch for help. 
When he found that neither could protect him he made peace 
with the Lombards on his own responsibility. He had to 
furnish the money to carry on the government of Rome; he 
resisted the decisions of the imperial olB&cials, and even opposed 
the emperor himself on behalf of some people who had been 
falsely accused; the people turned naturally to him and begged 
him to lay their appeals before the emperor or the king of the 
Lombards; the oversight of the defense of the city fell upon 
him and he reproved or praised the leaders of the troops; when 
the troops in Naples were without a leader, he appointed one 
for them; and when Nepi was without a governor, he appointed 
one for that city. Gregory I (590-604) said that his political 
duties were so absorbing and numerous that he could hardly 
tell whether he was an ecclesiastical or secular official. 

This solidarity showed itself in a striking manner when the 
growing dissatisfaction of the Italians with the imperial (Greek) 
government caused them to rally around the pope, who was the 

only part of the government that was still Italian. 
Support the Of the former government of Rome the pope was 
thTEmperor. ^^^ ^hat was left. The senate* was no longer of 

importance; the prefect of the city, who had once 
Power°in ^ been the governor, the mayor, the police director, 
Increases ^^^ ^^^ j^^ge of the city, was now merely a judge, 

and all his other functions had passed into the hands 
of the pope. Since 553 Greek officials had taken the place of 

* It is generally believed that the senate ceased to exist, since it is 
not mentioned after 603. Yet the senatorial class, the nobility, still 
existed, and about 750 the "holy senate" wrote a letter to Pippin 
(See M. G. Epp, III, 510), 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 153 

Italians in all the government offices, and both as foreigners and 
as merciless tax-collectors they were hated by the people. 
These Greek officials were no doubt often guilty of injustice and 
oppression. Now, the pope was the only one who was in a 
position to interfere with them on behalf of the Italians. Com- 
munity of interests, racial feeling, and Roman pride in the pope 
as an Italian and as the last relic of their old government, all 
combined to unite the Italians to the pope in such a way as to 
form something like a state. As the bonds of this union grew 
stronger the pope began to act with more independence. The 
time came when, backed by the arms of the Italians, he was 
able to resist the commands of the emperor, and even to free 
himself to a great extent from imperial domination. The power 
of the pope was daily growing into a state with all of sovereignty 
except the name. 

The pope acquired an important sovereign power when he 
got possession of the military forces of Rome. Toward the 
middle of the seventh century mention is made of a military 

organization of the Italians, which seems to have 
Controls the been much like what we call militia, or home guards. 
Rome^ °^ The frequent inroads of the Lombards had no doubt 

led the people to organize for their protection. 
This militia put itself under the command of the pope, and 
chiefly through its support he was enabled to resist successfully 
the emperor's commands.* In resisting the emperors the popes 
were struggling not only for themselves but also for the free- 
dom of Italy. This the Italians understood, and the time 
came when they took up arms to defend their pope against 
their emperor, f 

* The troops of Rome passed completely into the pope's hands. 
Thus, in 730 he put his generals and a part of his troops at the disposal 
of the exarch to quell a rebellion in Tuscany. In 778 Adrian I spoke 
of them as "our general army." 

t In 692 a council held in Constantinople formulated doctrines in 
accordance with the command of the emperor. These doctrines Pope 
Sergius I (687-701) rejected, and the emperor sent a high official to 
Rome to take him and bring him a prisoner to Constantinople, Hear- 
ing of this, the militia of Ravenna and of the Pentapolis hastened to 
Rome, surrounded the papal palace, demanded to see the pope, and 



154 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Papal independence and resistance to the emperor became 

pronounced under Gregory II (715-731). The emperor, Leo 

III (716-741), attempted to levy a tax on Italy, including the 

patrimony of St. Peter. To this Gregory II ob- 

Excommuni- jccted and the militia of Italy supported him. In 

Emperor. 7^7 the emperor forbade the religious use of images 

„ ^ and ordered them to be removed from the churches, 

b. a., 41, 42. 

The pope opposed this also, and published the 
statement that the emperor's command was heretical. When 
the exarch and the imperial officials (dukes) attempted to en- 
force it the people rebelled against them in support of the 
pope. The militia even killed the exarch and various other 
officials who tried to carry out the decree. Gregory II then 
took a step hitherto unheard of. In a vigorous letter he con- 
demned the imperial action and excommunicated the emperor. 
He declared in the plainest terms that matters of faith and 
worship concerned not the emperor but the pope. His suc- 
cessor, Gregory III (731-741), excommunicated in a formal 
way all who opposed images. The emperor was unable to 
send troops into Italy to punish the pope and his supporters, 
but he confiscated the rich patrimony of St. Peter in Sicily and 
southern Italy. Although this quarrel was very bitter, it did 
not signify that Italy freed itself from imperial rule. Imperial 
officials were still in Italy and even in Rome, and friendly re- 
lations between the pope and emperor were later renewed 
(after 741). 

The policy of the Lombards had so important an influence 
on the development of the secular power of the pope that it is 
necessary to recount their history, dull though it be, at some 
The Pope length. The coming of the Lombards (568) and 
Heads the their desire to rule all Italy rendered the position 

Opposition . '■ 

to the of the pope precarious. He was threatened with 

om ar s. ^^^ domination of a heretical king, and was there- 
fore forced into greater political activity in order to maintain 

refused to go away until the imperial official had withdrawn from the 
city, leaving the pope in security. A few years later the militia of all 
Italy came to Rome to protect the pope, John VI (701-705), when it 
was reported that the emperor was going to seize him. 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 155 

the freedom which he had won. About 700 the provinces of 
Italy which were under the rule of the exarch were (i) Istria, 
(2) Venice, (3) Ravenna, (4) the Pentapolis, (5) Perugia, (6) 
Rome, (7) Naples, and (8) Calabria. Although the exarch was 
the nominal ruler of these duchies, as they were all called, the 
pope's authority in them was actually greater than his. The 
pope had a large income and could count on the arms of the 
militia, while the exarch had but meagre financial resources 
and few troops on whom he could rely. The task of holding 
all these duchies together and preserving them against the 
attacks of the Lombards devolved, therefore, upon the pope. 
He assumed the task for two special reasons: (i) The Lombards 
did not spare his patrimony, and (2) as they were several times 
on the point of conquering all Italy the pope's position of un- 
trammelled freedom depended on his maintaining the political 
unity of the provinces of central Italy with himself at their 
head.* To this end he adopted the policy of allying himself 

* The pope's first care was to prevent the Lombards from getting 
possession of the roads which connected these duchies. In 717 the 
duke of Benevento took Cumae and cut off the free communication 
between Rome and Naples. Gregory II paid the Neapolitan militia 
seventy pounds to retake it. In 728 LIutprand, king of the Lombards, 
seized Sutri, and thus cut off communication between Rome and Peru- 
gia. In order to secure its restoration the pope made use of an argu- 
ment which was later to become the basis for the founding of an eccle- 
siastical state. Wishing to produce an overwhelming effect on Liut- 
prand, the pope declared that Rome and all its possessions were under 
the special protection of St. Peter, and any violation of his rights 
would bring down a severe penalty upon the offender; violence against 
the lands of St. Peter was sacrilege and would be punished accordingly; 
Liutprand might, however, gain the favor and blessing of the prince 
of the apostles by restoring his possessions to him. This produced 
the desired effect, and he restored Sutri. 

In 728 the exarch made a determined effort to enforce the decree 
against the use of images and to compel the pope to accept it. To this 
end he secured the aid of Liutprand by agreeing first to aid him in re- 
ducing the rebellious Lombard dukes of Spoleto and Benevento to 
subjection. Their expedition against Spoleto and Benevento was 
successful, and Liutprand received the submission of their dukes, but 
when they appeared before Rome to besiege it, the pope so impressed . 
Liutprand with the danger of attacking St. Peter's possessions that 
he refused to aid the exarch against Rome and withdrew. Sometime 
between 731 and 735 Liutprand attacked the exarch and took Ravenna 
for a short time. The pope, who did not wish to see the power of 



156 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

with the dukes of Benevento and Spoleto, who had, in the hope 
of re-establishing their independence, rebelled against Liut- 
prand, the king of the Lombards. Liutprand, however, drove 
out the duke of Spoleto, who then fled to Rome. When Liut- 
prand appeared before the city and demanded the surrender 
of his rebellious vassal, both the pope and the people of Rome 
refused. Liutprand besieged Rome in vain, be- 

The 

Lombards cause the popes (Sisinnius, Gregory II, and Gregory 
RonS^ m) ^2,d repaired its walls and put it in a good state 

„ of defense. In his distress the pope appealed to 

Charles Martel, but in vain. Fortunately, Liut- 
prand, finding that he could not take the city, gave up the siege 
and withdrew, although he devastated the duchy and seized 
some of the papal castles. In 742 Liutprand again besieged 
Ravenna, but yielded to the pope's entreaties and withdrew. 
The pope then had a short respite. 

Liutprand had felt that his people must possess all Italy, but 
every time he had tried to advance his boundaries the pope had 
blocked him. His death in 744 was followed by a struggle for 
_ , the crown, during which the rival candidates had 

Rachis. ' , . , . 

no leisure for conquest. The successful one, Rachis, 
had at first no desire to break with the pope. But he too soon 
felt that the existence of the Lombards was bound up with the 
possession of all Italy, and in 749 he began the advance by 
taking forcible possession of Perugia. Again the pope held up 
before him the heinousness of his sin in attacking the lands of 
St. Peter, and Rachis was so impressed that he resigned his 
crown and went into a monastery to spend the rest of his life 
in penance. This, however, was the last time that the en- 
treaties of the pope and the fear of St. Peter were effectual. 
.. ,, The new king, Aistulf, renewed the policy of his 

Aistulf. 1-1 . , 

predecessors, and tried to unite all Italy under 
Lombard sway. In 751 he seized the exarchate, the Pentapolis, 

the Lombards increased, did all he could to recover the city for the 
exarch. In 738 the duke of Spoleto seized Gallese, a papal castle pro- 
tecting the road from Rome to Ravenna. After trying all other means 
in vain to recover it the pope paid a heavy ransom for it. 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 157 

and Perugia, and at least threatened Venice and Istria. He 

took everything, in fact, up to the duchy of Rome. With this 

the Greek rule in northern Italy was at an end. Deaf to all 

expostulations and threats, Aistulf refused to restore any of his 

conquests, but was willing to make a treaty with the pope for 

forty years and to promise not to attack the duchy of Rome. 

He broke the treaty, how^ever, within four months and invaded 

the duchy of Rome. He demanded (i) a poll tax from every 

Roman, and (2) complete jurisdiction in the duchy. These 

demands the pope must resist by force, for if he did not the 

papal government would come to an end. But where was he 

to find the necessary aid? Just then imperial ambassadors 

appeared at Rome, bringing a command from the emperor to 

the effect that the pope should aid in recovering all the imperial 

possessions in Italy. This the pope, Stephen III, was willing 

and anxious to do, but he knew that it could be done only 

by force. Accordingly, he demanded troops of the emperor. 

Again imperial ambassadors came, bringing in the place of 

troops a command that the pope should proceed to Aistulf 

and demand the restoration of the Greek lands which he had 

conquered. In the meantime, the pope, foreseeing 

Appeals to that he could have no help from Constantinople, 

ippin. j^^^ ggj^^ ambassadors to Pippin, king of the Franks, 

Cf. s. B., ^iTid had secured from him an invitation to visit 
41-40. 

him m Frankland. In company with the ambas- 
sadors of both the emperor and Pippin, the pope went to see 
Aistulf and laid before him the demand of the emperor. Aistulf 
refused it, and the pope proceeded to Frankland, where he spent 
several months, the guest of the Prankish king. 

Stephen III besought Pippin to assume the protection of the 
cause of St. Peter and of the "state of the Romans" (it is un- 
certain whether this expression means the empire or 
Frankland. the duchy of Rome, though probably the latter), and 
5 g to bring about a permanent peace between them 

{i. e., St. Peter and the "state of the Romans") 
and the Lombards. This he should do peaceably, if pos- 
sible; otherwise through armed intervention. Stephen asked 



158 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

that peace be re-established not on the basis of the existing hold- 
ings of the Lombards, but that they should surrender to him as 
the representative of the interests of the "state of the Romans" 
all their recent conquests. That is, he named a boundary line 
running across Italy, to the north of which the Lombards should 
be compelled to withdraw, thus vacating all their conquests 
made since about 590. This line had for a few years (about 
590-600) been approximately the boundary between the Lom- 
bards and the provinces which were under the exarch. Owing 
to the fact that it consisted of mountains and a number of 
strongly fortified cities, it might well have served as a boundary 
between two states.* Pippin called his nobles to a diet and 
persuaded them to confirm the agreement which he had just 
made with the pope. That is, they agreed to interfere in Italy 
in favor of the pope against the Lombards, and, by force of 
arms if necessary, to compel them to restore to the pope the 

provinces in question. As a result of two campaigns 
Pippin's into Italy Pippin was able to take from the Lom- 

ParSallT bards about twenty cities (by no means all that were 
Fulfilled. included in his promise) and hand them over to 

the pope. Although he had demanded much more 
territory, the pope nevertheless made peace with the Lombards, 
but continued, however, to make further territorial acquisi- 
tions from them whenever he could do so. We have already 
learned that Desiderius, the successor of Aistulf, finally renewed 
the war on the pope, and that Charlemagne, at the appeal of 
the poj>e, came into Italy, defeated Desiderius, and took pos- 
session of the kingdom of the Lombards (774). Although 
Charlemagne had taken an oath to fulfil the promise of his 
father. Pippin, he nevertheless broke it and as king of the 
Lombards retained possession of the territory which the pope 

* The provinces which the pope asked for were described in a docu- 
ment which took the form of a promise of Pippin to restore them to 
the pope. The description is as follows: "From Luna (the island of 
Corsica being included), to Suriano, thence over the Apennines to Ber- 
ceto, thence to Parma, thence to Reggio, and thence to Mantua and 
Monselice; that is, the whole exarchate of Ravenna, as it had been of 
old, with the provinces of Istria and Venice; and, besides, the duchies 
of Benevento and Spoleto." 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 159 

claimed. As a compromise, however, he later granted Adrian 
certain cities in Tuscany and the royal taxes from Tuscany 
and Spoleto.* In undisputed possession, however, of certain 
lands and cities, the pope was, from that time, in fact a tem- 
poral ruler. 

What was the relation of the pope to the new possessions? 
To answer this controverted question, certain considerations 
must be taken into account, (i) The pope was under the 
government of the Greek emperor at that time, and 
stifl Subject remained under it for many years. To be sure, the 
Emperor P^P^ ^^^ gradually come to rule Rome, and the 
Greek dukes in the duchy of Rome were without 
actual power.f (2) At the time when Stephen went into Frank- 
land (753-754) he was on good terms with the emperor. Two 
embassies from Constantinople had recently come to him, and 
it was in obedience to the emperor's command that he under- 
took the journey to Aistulf on his way to Frankland. Further- 
more, these friendly relations between popes and emperors 
continued to exist for a long time. (3) Not only did the rela- 
tions between pope and emperor continue to be friendly; they 
were also such as exist between a sovereign and his subject. 
The emperors continued to possess the sovereign right of coinage 
in Italy, and till 774 coins minted by the pope in Rome bore 
the imperial likeness. In official documents the popes still 
called the emperor "our lord," and dated their writings accord- 
ing to the year of his reign. From this we must infer that in 
theory the emperor was still sovereign over the pope, although 
it is evident from many other facts that the pope was exer- 
cising a power that approximated actual sovereignty. The 

* The "promise" of Pippin was, therefore, not entirely fulfilled 
either by himself or his son Charlemagne. It remained, nevertheless, 
g g as an ideal ever before the popes, toward the realization 

"' of which they could work. This "promise" was one of 

the documents laid before Otto I for the purpose of securing his con- 
firmation of the papal possessions (962). 

t The last of these Greek dukes of whom we have any record was a 
certain Stephen, during the pontificate of Zacharias (741-752); all 
later dukes, it is said, were appointed by the popes. Yet merely from 
the silence of our meagre sources we dare not infer that there were 
no longer Greek officials in Rome. 



i6o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

heresy of the Greeks (their prohibition of the use of images in 
the churches) gave Adrian I (772-795) good ground for enlarging 
his actual authority. Refusing to recognize a heretical emperor, 
he began to coin money in his own name and to omit the year 
of the emperor's reign from his documents. Even with these 
changes Adrian I neither claimed nor possessed absolute sover- 
eignty over his lands. 'The idea that the empire was universal 
and indivisible still prevailed, and Adrian I did not even dream 
of saying that his lands were not a part of the empire. He had 
rebelled against a heretical emperor; as soon as the emperor 
became orthodox the pope recognized him again. So in 787 
Adrian wrote to the emperor, Constantine, and his mother 
Irene: "May the Lord preserve our unconquered princes and 
great emperors." We must therefore conclude that the pope 
was merely the governor, not the absolute sovereign, of the 
lands which he held. His position was similar to that of many 
other bishops who held the office of count or duke. 

Of their actual power the popes were very jealous, and re- 
sisted all interference from whatever quarter. They were not 
able, however, for some centuries to convert it immediately 
into constitutional sovereignty, nor did they at- 

Charlemagne t <• i • i • • i i 

Exercised tempt to do SO. In fact their relations with the 
in Rome!^*^^ kings of the Franks for some time diminished their 
actual power. In conferring the title of patricius 
of the Romans on Pippin, and again on Charle- 
magne, the pope created another ruler over himself. Pippin 
did not attempt to exercise the rights of his office, but Charle- 
magne, after conquering the Lombards, took his office seriously 
and assumed sovereignty over the pope. He re- 
buked Adrian I for publishing the decrees of the 
council of Nicaea (787) without first receiving the royal permis- 
sion to do so, and informed Leo III that he should devote him- 
self strictly to the spiritual duties of his office. The establish- 
ment of an imperial line in the west (800) revived to a certain 
extent the sovereign rights of the emperor, and so put limits 
to the actual power of the pope. Thus (i) the German emperor 
assumed jurisdiction in Rome, even over papal officials, and his 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY i6i 

representatives were the highest court of justice in Rome. 
(2) The emperor demanded that the people of Rome take an 
oath of fideUty to him. (3) In the matter of papal elections, 
the emperor required that an account of the election be sent 
to him, and forbade the newly elected pope to be invested 
with his office until he had received the imperial confirmation 
of his election. It is evident, therefore, that in the ninth cen- 
tury the pope, although the temporal ruler of Rome, was never- 
theless not sovereign, but was subject to the emperor. The 
time was to come, however, when he was to assert his sover- 
eignty not only over Rome but even over the whole world. 
Let us now sketch the origin of this stupendous claim.* 

* The feeling that the pope's sovereignty in Rome was actual and 
the wish to make it constitutional led to the famous forgery called 
the "donation of Constantine." The date of its fabrication cannot 
be definitely determined, but it probably falls in the latter half of the 
eighth century (about 772). It relates that the emperor Constantine 
was afflicted with leprosy and, after physicians had failed to cure him, 
St. Peter and St. Paul appeared to him in a dream and told him to 
call Pope Silvester, who was then in hiding because of the persecutions 
of Christians. Constantine did so, and Silves,ter, after instructing 
him in the doctrine of the Trinity, baptized him. When Constantine 
came up out of the font he found that his leprosy was healed. Out 
of gratitude he established a church in the Lateran palace as the 
head of all the churches of the world, and built churches in honor of 
the two apostles who had appeared to him. For the support of the 
lamps in these churches Constantine endowed them with lands and 
possessions "in the east as well as in the west, and even in the north 
and in the south, namely: in Judaea, Greece, Asia, Thrace, Africa, 
and Italy, and in various islands." 

To Silvester and to all his successors Constantine gave the Lateran 
palace, and the right to wear all the imperial ornaments and articles of 
dress — diadem, robe, mantle, collar, tunic, the imperial sceptre, and, 
in short, everything that indicated the imperial rank. The emperor 
also conferred upon him and his successors "the city of Rome, and the 
provinces, places, and cities of the western regions." That is, the 
emperor gave the pope constitutional sovereignty over all the west. 
Furthermore, because it was not proper that the earthly emperor 
should have authority where the heavenly emperor had established the 
head of the Christian religion and the priestly rule, Constantine with- 
drew from Rome and established the seat of his empire at Byzantium, 
which was called after him Constantinople. It is unnecessary to say 
that this is all pure invention. Constantine never had leprosy, he was 
not baptized till near the end of his life, and his baptism did not take 
place at Rome. 



i62 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The rise of the papal claim of universal temporal sovereignty 
can be easily traced. At 'the beginning of the Middle Age it 
was the common belief that God had foreordained that the 
empire should never pass away; and that He had 
1073-1085, appointed the emperor to rule over the world, giv- 
Universal ing him Supreme authority over it. The emperor, 
SoverSgnty therefore, based his authority on "divine right." 
In opposition to this imperial theory, the pope, 
Gregory VII (1073-1085), formulated the papal 
theory by which he claimed supreme temporal authority over 
the whole world, declaring that "our Lord Jesus Christ has 
made the blessed St. Peter ruler over the kingdoms of this 
world"; in place of the empire the church was to be eternal; 
in place of the emperor the pope was, by divine right, the ruler 
of the world, having the right to make and depose emperors 
and kings. A few popes, such as Gregory VII, Alexander III, 
and Innocent III, were able to realize approximately their 
ideal of temporal supremacy over thj^ Qhdstian world. 

A variety of causes aided the popes in the development and 
realization of their theory, (i) It needed no proof that the 
soul was more important than the body, and that the spiritual 
^i^jgjQ interests of man were superior to his temporal in- 

Papal terests. From this it seemed to follow logically 

that the pope, who was intrusted with things spiri- 

■' ^ ■ tual, should be superior to the emperor, who was 

intrusted with things temporal. (2) The donation of Con- 
stantine no doubt contributed its share, although its influence 
cannot be traced in detail. (3) The popes made use of the 
authority of the Bible, many passages of which they quoted to 
enforce their claims. In that age these lines of argument were 
convincing, and would of themselves have done much to bring 
about papal supremacy. (4) The popes owed their success in 
realizing their claims to world sovereignty chiefly, however, to 
the embryonic stage in which the governments of Europe were 
during the early centuries of the Middle Age. The lack of 
unity, of compactness, of efficiency, and of strength in these 
governments has often been shown. Everywhere the crown 



THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 163 

was in a struggle with its vassals, and often enough was de- 
feated by them. Feudalism at its height marks the degree of 
this impotence of the central governments. In their weakness 
emperors and kings did not hesitate to call on the pope for help 
against their subjects. They also sought the consent and ap- 
proval of the pope for their most important undertakings. In 
this way they assisted in creating a series of papal acts which 
served as precedents and the basis for a large theory of papal 
authority. 

A brief recital of a few of these acts will show their impor- 
tance in the development of the papal theory, (i) In 751, when 
Pippin, mayor of the palace, desired to be made king of the 
Franks he sought to make the change more accept- 
AcS^"^ ^^ able to them by first securing from the pope a state- 
g g g ment that the change seemed a desirable one. In 

754 the pope went to visit Pippin and set the ap- 
proval of the church on the change in dynasty by solemnly 
recrowning Pippin and anointing him and his family with holy 
oil. Although the change was really made by the Prankish 
nobles, a few centuries later it was commonly believed that the 
pope had deposed the "do-nothing" king and put Pippin into 
his place. 

(2) In the ninth century the pope, by crowning three succes- 
sive emperors, established the theory that he alone had the 
right to crown the emperor. In the first place he crowned 
Charlemagne, in the name, as we have seen, of the people who 
elected him. That Charlemagne did not regard the imperial 
crown as within the gift of the pope is shown by the fact that 
he caused his son, Ludwig the Pious, to crown himself (813). 
After the death of his father Ludwig recrowned himself, but 
made the mistake of permitting the pope to recrown him again 
in 817. At the time the pope did not claim that he was con- 
ferring the crown, but only that as the head of the church he 
should crown the emperor who was the head of the Christian 

„ „ world. When Ludwig the Pious divided his realm 

s. B., SI. ^ 

among his sons (817) he crowned Lothar emperor. 
But in 824 Lothar permitted himself to be recrowned by the 



i64 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

pope. Thereafter it was believed that the pope alone had the 
right to perform the coronation act. Although it was generally 
held, in Germany at least, that the king of the Germans had a 
right to the imperial crown, some popes denied this, and de- 
clared that they might confer the crown on whom they would. 

(3) Toward the end of the tenth century the pope acted as 
if he were the source of all political authority. About 990 the 
ruler of the Poles put his territory "under the protection of St. 

Peter," and the pope agreed to give him the royal 
title. For some unknown reason the plan was not 
carried out. A few years later, however, Stephen, the ruler of 
the Hungarians, offered himself, his people, his kingdom, and 
all his possessions to the pope as the vicar of St. Peter, and 
begged to be made a king. The pope accepted the gift, con- 
ferred the title of king upon him, sent him the crown which he 
had prepa^ced for the duke of the Poles, and assumed the pro- 
tection and a sort of proprietorship over him and his kingdom 
(1000). 

(4) In 1059 Nicholas II conferred the title of duke on Rob- 

_ ^ „ ert Guiscard, and confirmed him in the possession 
o. a., 58. 

of southern Italy, which he had conquered, and 

conferred on him Sicily, which he was yet to conquer. 

(5) Both Innocent II (1130-1143) and the antipope Ana- 
clete II (1130-1138) conferred the title of king on duke Roger 
of Sicily, and raised the duchy to the rank of a kingdom. 

(6) In 1066 William the Conqueror sought and obtained the 
papal sanction and blessing for his proposed invasion of England. 

These examples show how general the belief was that the 
pope's authority extended over political matters, and with so 
many important precedents it is not strange that Gregory VII 
should have formulated the broadest claims to temporal sov- 
ereignty over all the Christian world. 



CHAPTER IX 
MONASTICISM 

Asceticism, on which monasticism is based, is the practice 
of extreme self-denial in food, drink, dress, sleep, and in the 
necessities as well as in the comforts of life; it is the withdraw- 
ing from the world, the self-infliction of pain, ex- 
cessive devotion to prayer and other pious duties and 
works, in the belief that whatever abases, pains, or does violence 
to the body produces a corresponding purification of soul and 
assists in atoning for sin. But how did such an idea gain so 
large a place in the Christian church, whose founder was not 
ascetic, and who exhibited a calm, deep-seated joy in life, and 
was even called a wine-bibber and a friend of publicans and 
sinners ? 

The answer to this question is found in the fact that the 
thought of the whole civilized world of that day was perme- 
ated with asceticism. During the first three centuries of our 
era there were several popular, wide-spread systems 
Philosophies. ^^ philosophy flourishing in the empire. All of 
them were ascetic in character, and by their teach- 
ings' they paved the way for the monasticism of the church. In 
these popular systems of philosophy, chief of which were cyni- 
cism, stoicism, neo-Pythagoreanism, gnosticism, and neo-Pla- 
tonism,* we find the philosophic basis for the asceticism which 
was organized in the church under the name of monasticism. 
Each of these systems made an important contribution to the 
monastic ideal, and all helped prepare the minds of the people 
for the ready acceptance of it. 

These popular philosophies had all been developed from the 

* The reader should by all means consult some history of philosophy, 
or some encyclopedia for a more complete statement of the principles 
and practices of these philosophies. 

165 



i66 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

teaching of Socrates that the chief end of man was self-knowl- 
edge and the practice of virtue. Philosophers and moralists 
had developed this idea and had tried to define self-knowledge 
and virtue, and to determine the best method of acquiring them. 
Even Plato and Aristotle taught that the highest life was one 
of pure, serene contemplation. Their successors in the field of 
philosophy had agreed with them, and furthermore they had 
formulated many rules for the guidance of those who were 
seeking to attain it. They were essentially agreed that the 
man who wished to know himself and to practise the highest 
virtue should withdraw as far as possible from the duties, dis- 
tractions, and cares which beset him in the family, in society, 
and in the state, and should live in quiet seclusion, with his eyes 
turned inward in solemn contemplation of his soul — of himself. 
They taught that a man who was thus poised upon himself, 
indifferent to all external things, rich in the contemplation of 
himself, and feeling no need of the things of this world, was 
approaching the loftiest ideal and acquiring the highest wisdom. 
And this idea was, in one way or another, embodied in the pop- 
ular philosophies of the day, which were therefore religious and 
ascetic rather than speculative. They disparaged the world 
and tended to fill their adherents with dissatisfaction with it. 
They sought to estrange the soul from all surrounding objects. 
A brief statement about some of these systems of philosophy 
will help us understand the origin of monasticism. 

Cynicism, a popular philosophy with a considerable follow- 
ing, declared that the highest good consisted in the practice of 
virtue, and that virtue consisted in despising pleasures, knowl- 

^ . . edsre, family, friends, wealth, culture, in a word, 

Cynicism. 

everything that the world esteems; and that the 

man who, scorning the world, was independent of all outward 

circumstances, had attained the highest good. In practice, 

cynicism was the glorification of poverty, filth, and ignorance 

— the negation of culture. 

Stoicism, which also had a numerous following, especially 

among the cultured class, was essentially a system of ethical 

culture. It taught that virtue, that is, proper conduct, was 



MONASTICISM 167 

the sole end to be sought in life, and that it could be attained 

without learning and knowledge. For the stoic, virtue consisted 

. in a freedom from all desires, of whatever kind, and 

from all external wants, and in the destruction of 
all disturbing emotions. He strove to be superior to poverty 
and to wealth, to sorrow and to joy, to pain and to pleasure — 
in short, to all external conditions and circumstances. Com- 
plete self-renunciation and complete self-control formed his 
ideal. 

Gnosticism taught the dualism of spirit and matter; its 
fundamental idea was that matter is evil and the seat of evil, 
while spirit is good and becomes contaminated only when it is 

brought into contact with matter; every soul was 
Ascetic"^"^ pure until it was joined to a body, by contact with 

which it was rendered impure. From this body, 
sinful because composed of matter, the soul should be freed and 
purified by all kinds of ascetic exercises. To this end gnostics 
made specific rules of conduct: they forbade the use of certain 
meats and drinks, and sought to shun as far as possible all 
contact with the material elements of this world. "Touch 
not, taste not, handle not" (Col. 2 : 21) was the guiding prin- 
ciple of their conduct, by observing which they hoped to re- 
deem the soul from its corrupting union with the body. They 
made use of certain technical terms to which they attached 
peculiar importance, among which were "fulness" (7rX?;pcojua), 
"wisdom" (cro<^ta), and "knowledge" (ypcoaLS, whence the 
name of their system, gnosticism). 

Their conception of evil grew out of the gnostic theory of 
the origin of evil which was a part of their theory of creation. 
They believed that there was first of all an original spirit so 

pure and fine that he could have nothing to do with 
Ev^l^ ° matter, not even in its creation. He was so fine in 

his essence that he could not even reveal himself in 
any way. Hence he was declared to be an "unfathomable 
abyss," "indefinable," "indescribable," "unnamable," and 
"unknowable." From him, the first spirit, there emanated a 
second spirit a little less fine than he, and from this second 



i68 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

spirit a third, and so on through an infinite series of emanations 
until finally a spirit was produced which was so coarse that he 
was capable of creating matter. In this fantastic way gnostics 
bridged the infinite gulf which existed between spirit and mat- 
ter. For this last and lowest of emanations created matter as 
an act of malice toward the purer spirits above him. This crea- 
tion of matter was the creation of evil. Gnostics indulged in 
the wildest speculation about these myriads of spirits which 
formed the scale between pure spirit and matter, classifying 
them, defining their activities, and ranking them according to 
their powers. They gave them names which are obscure to 
us, such as "asons," "demiurges," "thrones," "dominions," 
"principalities," and "powers" {cf. Col. i : i6). 

Many of the converts to Christianity during the first cen- 
turies were imbued with these ideas and sought in Christianity 
merely a more perfect ascetic system than they already pos- 
Gnostic sessed in their gnostic philosophy. They were still 

Christians. gnostics, but with a Christian bias. St. Paul came 
St. Paul into frequent conflict with gnostics and gnostic 

Gnostic ideas, and refuted them in some of his letters, de- 

ideas. daring that all such gnostic practices were opposed 

Struggle and to the principles of Christ's teachings.* The pres- 
ompromise. ^^^^ ^^ ^^ many gnostic Christians in the church 

led in the second century to a serious struggle. Many of them, 
unable to divest themselves of their philosophic theories, either 
denied the biblical account of creation, because it differed from 
their theory of it, or identified the God of the Old Testament 
with the evil spirit who had created matter. Consequently 

* In his letter to the Colossians he often refers to gnostic teachings, 
and uses their technical terms. The "invisible" God, he says, is not 
"unknowable," for he has revealed himself in Jesus, who is his image; 
the world was not created by an evil spirit, for Christ created all things 
that are in heaven and earth, "visible and invisible, whether they be 
thrones, or dominions, or principalities"; in Christ are all "fulness," 
and "all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge," and not in any of 
the emanations, as the gnostics declare; Christ was greater than all 
these emanations, by whatever name they are called, for he had tri- 
umphed over them; Christians should not worship these emanations 
(which Paul calls angels, Col. 2 :i8); matter— the material world is 



MONASTICISM 169 

they rejected the Old Testament entirely, and forbade Chris- 
tians to read it. The question was argued with great bitterness, 
and the contest ended in a compromise. The church retained 
the Old Testament as a revelation of the true God, rejected the 
gnostic theory of creation, and expelled the gnostics as heretics. 
But the church partially accepted the gnostic ideas about the 
evil character of matter, and began to assert that the world is 
wholly given over to the devil; all nature, the handiwork of 
God who had declared it to be very good, was, as a consequence 
of this compromise, regarded as sinful and contaminating. 
Such was the view that prevailed generally during the Middle 
Age, and that controlled the attitude of men toward nature. 
It was an unfortunate compromise that opened the door for 
the introduction of a formal asceticism into the church. 

Neo-Platonism, the last great system of heathen philosophy, 
claimed to be an absolute religion. Its theory of the origin of 
evil and of matter was similar to that of gnosticism. It taught 
the utter vanity of all earthly things. The one 
Piatonism. thing needful was a state of inward peace and re- 
pose of soul, and consequently its teachers devel- 
oped a system of ascetic rules and practices by which this state 
could be attained and maintained. They taught that by re- 
nunciation, by asceticism, the soul should be raised far above 
the things of this life. 

Now, owing to the wide diffusion and great popularity of 
these systems of philosophy, society in general, in the third 
century of our era, was permeated from top to bottom with 
ascetic ideas. So completely was philosophy identified with 

not evil, for It was created by Christ, and hence Christians should 
not obey the prohibitions of gnostics — "Touch not, taste not, handle 
not"; nor should they suffer any one to prescribe what they should eat 
or drink, or compel them to observe any day as holy, not even the 
sabbath. All these ascetic practices punish the body, indeed, but are 
of no value to the soul, for the kingdom of God consists not in the ob- 
servance of such external things. Instead of observing^ them Chris- 
tians should shun all evil desires, covetousness, anger, malice, blas- 
phemy, and other vices, and should practise mercy, kindness, humility, 
charity, and all Christian and humane virtues {cf. Col. i : 15-19; 2 : 3, 
15-23: 3 : 5-8). 



I70 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

asceticism that the ascetic life was called the philosophic life and 
a hermit was regarded as the true philosopher. The world was 
in an ascetic mood, and thousands were ready to 
Identified take to the desert if the way thither were but once 
Asceticism pointed out to them. In the third and fourth cen- 
turies Christianity rapidly became popular, and it 
was inevitable that many of its converts would be imbued with 
ascetic ideas from which they could not, of course, at once 
free themselves. They carried them into the church and sought 
Christian ' ^^ reconcile them with their new faith. These as- 
Teachers cetic ideas and practices were found not only among 

Attected 

by Pagan the laymen, for even Christian teachers, especially 
losop es. |.]^Qgg ^^ ^Yie east, were deeply influenced by these 
philosophies. They taught that the highest Christian ideal of 
life consisted in dying daily to the world, in separation from it, 
in losing oneself in the contemplation of God; and that the 
man who so lost himself in the contemplation of God that he 
forgot himself and his very existence would be freed from the 
material world, and finally be accounted worthy to obtain the 
beatific vision of the invisible God. 

Thus pagan philosophers and moralists and Christian teach- 
ers united in recommending an ascetic ideal of life in which 
there was no place for the acquisition of wealth, for the enjoy- 
ment of possessions, for the practice of civic virtues, 

All i^ln^^p^ 

Ascetic in or even for marriage. And, since the people were 
Century Saturated with these ideas, it could have been fore- 

seen that asceticism would become a large factor in 
the life of the church. Monasticism was inevitable. 

The increasing worldliness in the church — a phrase that 
covers a great many things — caused the asceticism in the church 
to take the particular form which is called monasticism, which 
The Devout ^^7 ^^ defined as organized asceticism. The 
Flee from church had undergone a profound change in the 

Worldhness ... a r- 

in the two hundred years of its existence. At first the 

Christian converts had before them an ideal Of per- 
fect holiness; they sought to keep themselves "unspotted from 
the world." Now, idolatry was so woven into the warp and 



MONASTICISM 171 

woof of daily life that no Christian could be an active member 
of society and of the state without incurring the guilt of idola- 
try in an infinite number of ways. This state of affairs tended 
to make the Christians a quiet sect, a group of holy people liv- 
ing quite outside of the great world. But such a position 
could not be maintained. Christians found that in order to 
gain a livelihood it was necessary to compromise with the 
world; a Christian artisan must ply his trade, even though it 
brought him into contact with idolatrous objects. So, imper- 
ceptibly, the church changed from a small band of holy en- 
thusiasts, who separated themselves from the world at any cost, 
to a people living in the world. Christian in name but sinners 
in fact, possessing the high ideals of the early Christians but 
practising many of the vices of the heathen world. The church 
discovered that its members needed the most patient and con- 
siderate education in Christian living. With the recognition 
of this change in its members the church became an institution 
in the world, existing for the religious training and eventual 

salvation of its people. The church was no longer 
sfnners^^ a body of saints, but a school for the training of its 

sinful members. All the time, however, there was 
a strict party in the church which opposed this change and 
insisted that all Christians should be holy, and that they should 
separate themselves completely from the world. They la- 
mented what they considered the degeneracy of the church 
and did their utmost to keep Christianity within the narrow 
bounds of a quiet and passive sect removed from the life of the 
world. Among the sects of this character were the Encratites, 
the Ebionites, the Marcionists, and the Montanists. This 
party was in the minority, fortunately, for if Christianity was 
to become an effective civilizing factor in the world — in the edu- 
cation and training of nations — it could not remain a holy and 
separated sect but must be in the world as a leaven leavening 
the whole mass. In this compromise the church may have 
lost something in enthusiasm and earnestness, but it gained 
immensely in that it became an educational and uplifting 
power in the lives of whole nations. By making this compro- 



172 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

mise Christianity became a world religion instead of a separa- 
tist sect without influence on the life of the world. 

This change from a band of holy enthusiasts to an institu- 
tion for the religious training and education of sinning humanity 
was, as has been said, accompanied by a loss in earnestness and 

also by an increase in formalism. Christianity as 
Christianity ^ filial attitude of mind toward God, which accepts 
Understood ^^^^ humility and gratitude whatever he may send; 

Christianity as a simplicity and purity of mind, 
which remain the same whether in poverty or wealth, in pros- 
perity or misfortune; Christianity as a life of love and service, 
and of "being a neighbor" to all who are in need — this Chris- 
tianity was not understood by the masses, who looked upon all 
religion as forms rather than life, as particular actions rather 
than a principle of conduct. The great majority of those who 
came from heathenism into the church were ignorant and in- 
capable of rising to so high a conception of religion; they had 
to be educated by forms and symbols. Worse than that, they 
were not all serious about the matter, but manifested a thought- 
less and worldly spirit which shocked the sterner members of 
the church, who in their zeal even courted martyrdom as the 
highest good that they could attain. A church in which the 
lax and worldly were in a rapidly increasing majority could not 
satisfy those who were so bitterly in earnest. For all such 
there was but one way of escape — flight from the world, flight 

from the church. So in the third century the 
Ideal. ^^^^ monastic movement began, when large numbers of 

those earnest Christians fled into the desert and 
sought salvation in a life of solitude, of contemplation, of silence, 
of privation, of fasting, of prayer, of poverty, of chastity — in a 
word, in a life of the most rigorous asceticism. They believed 
that the highest Christian ideal could be realized only outside 
of society. This was the negation of all that is human, for it 
took into account only the duty of man to God. They made 
the attempt to flee from everything that could in any way oc- 
casion sin — a hopeless attempt, for what is there which may 
not occasion sin? Their mechanical isolation from the world 



MONASTICISM 173 

might be virtually complete, but would that insure their spiri- 
tual isolation and its attendant elevation of soul? 

The eagerness with which thousands embraced this hermit 
life shows how thoroughly the minds of men were imbued with 
the ascetic philosophies of the time, and how deep and wide- 
spread was the dissatisfaction of soul among the 
Excesses. more thoughtful. The hermit life came to them 
as a great and joyful deliverance. It seemed so 
simple and sure a cure for all the ills of the soul that it became 
immensely popular. Although some of these hermits, rejoicing 
in the freedom from the distractions and burdens of society, 
found the desired relief in quiet contemplation and shared in 
the peace of nature about them, others indulged in the wildest 
excesses of self-torture. Some exposed themselves to the bite 
and sting of insects; some wallowed in mire and filth; some 
fasted until they died of hunger; some beat themselves with 
stones and whips, or lay naked on thorns and briars until their 
bodies were horrid with cuts, bruises, and sores; and others 
reached the limit of self-torture by spending years on the top of 
lofty pillars where there was not even room for them to lie 
down, and where, half-naked, they were exposed to the sun, 
rain, and wind. They exhausted human invention in discover- 
ing new and original ways of doing violence to their bodies. 

We do not know who the first monks were, because the be- 
ginnings of monasticism are lost in obscurity and overgrown 
with a tangle of improbable and contradictory legends. We 
do know, however, that about the middle of the 
"Monk" third century the movement began in Egypt and 
HeTmit western Asia, where the climate was such that 

those who lived out of doors suffered little from the 
inclemency of the weather. In those countries the monks 
needed protection chiefly against the heat of the sun, and this 
could be furnished by a tree, an overhanging rock, a cave, or a 
roof of palm leaves or reeds. At first they were true hermits, 
as the name monk indicates, each one living entirely alone. 
Sometimes they built their little cells near one another so that 
they formed a kind of colony of hermits. In countries where 



174 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the climate was more rigorous their manner of Hfe was modi- 
fied; they found it necessary to live together in houses. At 
the same time, however, they tried to preserve the essential 
features of the hermit life; each one had his own room or cell, 

prepared his own food, and ate and lived alone. 
the^Rule. The presence of impostors — false monks — among 
SB 2t;i • I them, and the mere fact that they were under the 

same roof made some kind of regulations necessary, 
and some one had to be chosen to see that they were observed. 
So, in a natural way, every monastery came to have its "rule," 
and head or abbot to enforce it. Basil the Great (died 379) 
brought about uniformity in the Greek monasteries by 
making a rule which was eventually adopted by them all. He 
did not, however, essentially modify their established manner of 
life, for he provided that each monk should live alone in his 
cell and have little in common with his fellow monks except 
certain religious services. 

Monasticism was first made known in the west about 340, 
and the movement soon assumed vast proportions. St. Jerome 
(died 419) and St. Augustine (354-430) displayed the greatest 

enthusiasm for it, and recommended it to popular 

Monasticism . ^ ,^ > ^ i •.• -r, ^ 

in the West. lavor by their example and writmgs. It spread 
R ^2 7,7, ^^^^ amazing rapidity to the remotest corners of 
Christendom. People of all ranks were fascinated 
by the monkish ideal. The monastery offered a retreat where, 
freed from all cares and responsibilities of daily life, men could 
devote themselves to prayer, meditation, and holy association 
with those who were seeking the same high ends. The com- 
munistic life has always possessed strong attractions for per- 
sons of a certain type, and the conditions prevailing at that 
time made the monk's life very desirable. For just then life 
in the world was not altogether delightful. The imperial gov- 
ernment was extremely oppressive, the cities were declining, a 
large class of the population was being impoverished, and the 
invasions of barbarians were bringing in their train an increas- 
ing amount of violence, injustice, oppression, and suffering. 
The monastery must have seemed to many a happy escape 



MONASTICISM 175 

from a world where violence was on the increase and life had 
lost its security and joy. The monastery offered an escape 
from the material, social, and political shipwreck that had come 
upon the world. 

As in the east so also in the west each monastery was inde- 
pendent of all others and made its own rule. This freedom 
and lack of common standards gave rise to various abuses. 
Many monks, disappointed in not obtaining the 
Abuses. inner peace which they sought, or finding the seclu- 

SB z"?!-! ^^^^ ^^^ discipline unbearable, grew tired of the 
life. Others, having embraced the monastic life 
without due deliberation, returned to the world after the first 
fit of enthusiasm was past, as if their monastic vows were not 
perpetually binding ("instability")- Some of those who de- 
serted the monastery retained the monk's robe because of the 
deference and regard which it secured for them. Wearing the 
monk's dress but without the monk's morals, they roved about 
the country, leading dissolute lives and bringing reproach on 
the name. Others did not feel themselves bound to remain 
forever in the same monastery, but wandered from one to an- 
other. In various ways those who were not in earnest found a 
way to escape the rigors of the rule and to avoid all discipline. 
There was no organization to punish such, and no means of 
subjecting them to discipline. 

All these abuses St. Benedict (died about 543) set himself to 
correct in the monastery of Monte Cassino (situated midway 
between Rome and Naples). He believed that the funda- 
mental error was the "instability" of the monks. 

St. Benedict. "^ 

He therefore laid down the principle, "Once a 
th^Rule.° monk, always a monk." He required the monk to 
g g take perpetual vows never to leave the monastery 

nor to forsake the monastic life ("stability"), to 
give up all secular and worldly practices and to conform to 
the ideals and standards of the monastic life, to observe the 
rule in every particular, to obey all his superiors as well as his 
abbot, and to lead a life of chastity and poverty. The life of 
a monk was therefore limited to a very narrow field. Monas- 



176 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ticism was the negation of all duties to the state and to society. 
The vow of obedience was the negation of all individuality; 
the vow of chastity was the negation of the family; and the 
vow of poverty was the negation of all industry and cut the 
nerve of personal endeavor. 

To prevent any one from too hastily becoming a monk each 
candidate had to undergo a novitiate, or period of probation, 
which would test him and give him the opportunity to dis- 
cover in time whether he was really fitted for the life or not. 
St. Benedict fixed the occupations of the monks for every hour 
of the day and night. He appointed periods for prayer, read- 
ing, study, contemplation, and work. Idleness was to be 
shunned as in itself a most dangerous vice, and as rendering 
the monk accessible to all kinds of temptations. Instead of 
the solitary life of the monks of the east, St. Benedict provided 
that his monks should live in common. They ate in a com- 
mon refectory, slept in a common dormitory, and passed all 
their time in the company of their fellow monks, so that privacy 
was unknown to them. No monk was allowed to possess prop- 
erty; when he entered the monastery he generally gave all his 
possessions to it. The strictest communism was practised, and 
no monk had the right even to the robe which he wore, since 
at the will of the abbot it might be taken from him and given 
to another. 

St. Benedict understood the human character and had a 
patient sympathy for its weaknesses and faults. His rule, like 
himself, was sane, sensible, and moderate. It sets forth lofty 
Christian ideals in an attractive way. A kindly 
Wo?k.^"''^^' and charitable tone pervades it. The broad pro- 
vision that the monk should work was probably the 
most important of its regulations, for it made the monks a 
great factor in the development of the west. Wherever they 
settled they began to till the soil and to introduce a better 
method of agriculture. They planted orchards, vineyards, and 
gardens. They taught the barbarians of Europe agriculture 
and the industrial arts as well as Christian doctrines. But not 
all their work was manual. They were required also to read 



MONASTICISM 177 

and study, and this kind of work was of even greater impor- 
tance for the culture of Europe. St. Benedict was not the first 
one to prescribe reading and study for the monks, 
Monasteries. t)ut through his rule learning found a home in 
the monasteries. In every monastery there was a 
school. For nearly six hundred years the monks were the 
schoolmasters of Europe; they wrote histories, chronicles, and 
biographies, from which we derive much of our knowledge of 
the period; and through their labors in copying manuscripts 
they preserved for us nearly all the literary treasures of Rome 
which we possess. 

The original ideal of the monks was a selfish one. They 
wished to separate themselves entirely from the world and to 
devote themselves to saving their own souls. Greek monks 
^. . , have been true to this ideal, and have, in fact, kept 
Popes Use themselves separated from the world. Conse- 
quently Greek monasticism has remained unchanged 
for fifteen hundred years, and has exercised only a reactionary 
influence on the life of the Greek church. There, as everywhere 
else, fixation means stagnation. In the west, however, the 
Roman spirit of organization, of conquest, and of activity 
would not allow this ideal to prevail. The monks had fled 
from the world, but the papacy used them to conquer and rule 
it. In the hands of popes, emperors, and kings they became the 
most effective tools for Christianizing and civilizing the bar- 
barians, and for extending the boundaries of both state and 
church. Abbots, like bishops, when found to possess ability, 
were used as the counsellors and helpers of kings, and monks 
were found to be the most efficient missionaries. For some 
centuries monks had a large share in the work of taming the 
forces of barbarism and enlisting them on the side of civiliza- 
tion. It was largely through their missionary labors that the 
remoter barbarian tribes were Christianized and the supremacy 
of the pope as head of the church established. 

St. Benedict made his rule merely for the monastery of Monte 
Cassino about 530. By a series of fortuitous circumstances, 
however, it came to be accepted everywhere in the west, dis- 



178 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

placing all others. Its spread was due in the first place to a 
great misfortune which befell the monastery of Monte Cassino, 

in its destruction by the Lombards (about 580). 
Rui?of °st. '^^^ monks, being forced to find another home, went 
Benedict. to Rome and established a monastery there. Pope 
s. B., 251 to Gregory the Great (590-604), being a Benedictine 
O.fii. monk, naturally recommended its rule to other 

monasteries, and its spread was favored by his 
great personal popularity. He himself founded a number of 
monasteries, into all of which he introduced the Benedictine 
rule. Owing to papal support and to the superiority of the rule, 
it was gradually accepted by all the monasteries of Rome, 
and from there found its way into all parts of Italy. Augus- 
tine, whom Gregory sent to England, was a Benedictine monk, 
and of course took the rule with him. In this way it became 
the rule of all English monasteries. In the eighth century 
Boniface, an English monk, introduced it into the monasteries 
of the Franks and of the other Germans among whom he labored. 
So, within three hundred years after its composition, the rule 
had become recognized as the best and was in force in all the 
monasteries in the west. 

The history of monasticism in the west does not, however, 
show the monks always living on the spiritual heights indicated 
by the rule. Their piety brought them popular favor; favor 
Relapses and brought them Wealth; and wealth too often brought 
Reforms. leisure, idleness, and profligacy. They had periods of 
Cf. s. B., 267, backsliding and worldliness, which were followed by 

periods of revival and renewed effort, during which 
the rigor of the original rule was increased and every effort 
made to prevent the possibility of another relapse. The most 
famous of all such revivals is connected with the monastery of 

Cluny, which was established (910) in the hills west 
its^Reform. of Macon, above the Rhone. Under the headship 
Q 2_ of a series of capable and earnest abbots, Cluny 

won a reputation far and wide for piety. With 
its growing fame the number of its monks increased until it 
could no longer accommodate all who sought admission. The 



MONASTICISM 179 

abbot then began to send out colonies of monks to establish 
new monasteries, the control of which he kept in his own hands. 
As the spirit of reform awoke elsewhere, other monasteries 
voluntarily put themselves under the control of the abbot of 
Cluny and asked him to send them one or more monks to in- 
troduce the reformed rule and discipline. In this way some 
two thousand monasteries were bound to Cluny and shared in 
its spiritual life and ideals. The result was a powerful religious 
revival which affected all Europe. 

It is difficult to state adequately the whole reform pro- 
gramme of Cluny, especially since it was developed slowly 
in the course of a hundred and fifty years or more. Perhaps it 

will be sufficient to note that the monastic rule was 
Programme^ made more rigorous and was to be more vigorously 

enforced; the sacerdotal character of the clergy was 
to be emphasized, and they were to be separated more completely 
from the world; they were to be forbidden to marry, and were 
to be put under strict discipline by being compelled to live to- 
gether in monasteries, subject to a rule, with their bishop as 
their head. The clergy, with whom the monks were now 
reckoned, were to form a spiritual aristocracy, freed from all 
secular control, from secular law and judges, with a law of their 
own which they alone administered. The laity were to be ex- 
cluded from all share in the management of church affairs, and 
should no longer control the election and investiture of bishops 
or the choice of the parish priests. Because of their priestly 
character the clergy were superior to the laity, and were to have 
complete authority over them, at least in all ecclesiastical and 
religious matters. Owing to the greater importance of spiritual 
things, they had no doubt that whenever there was a conflict 
between the two, it was the temporal which should always give 
way. Gregory VII, having been a monk at Cluny, was imbued 
with its spirit and ideas, and when he came to the papal throne 
(1073) he claimed not only the spiritual authority over the 
whole Christian world but also the political authority. The 
tenth and eleventh centuries were largely dominated by the 
Cluniac movement. 



i8o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The growth of the monastic spirit under the influence of 
Cluny led to the establishment of several new orders, with 
more severe rules. Many of these won only local fame and 
__ _ , need not be named. But the Carthusians, founded 

New Orders. . ' 

in 1084, the Cistercians, in 1098, and the Carmel- 
ites, in 1 1 56, became large and powerful orders, and were dif- 
fused throughout Europe. Their asceticism was extreme. 
The Carthusians and Cistercians may be said to have revived 
some of the original features of monasticism, inasmuch as they 
imposed a stricter silence on their members and abolished the 
common life of the Benedictines, each monk being restricted 
to his little cell, passing his time there as if in solitary con- 
finement. 

Monasticism, as we have been studying it, concerned only 
the monks and not the clergy. For monks, we must under- 
stand, were not necessarily clergymen. At first, indeed, they 
The Clergy were all laymen, and they were rather doubtful 
Live about admitting clergymen to membership in their 

a Monastic houses. But, as they needed the services of clergy- 
men for the administration of the sacraments, it 
soon became customary for them to require a few of their 
number to take priestly orders. Nevertheless, the majority of 
the monks throughout the Middle Age were undoubtedly lay- 
men. The ordinary clergy of the church, however, were also 
affected by the monastic movement. St. Augustine, bishop of 
Hippo in Africa (died 430), it is said, brought all the clergy of 
his diocese together and had them live in common with him 
under a rule which was essentially monastic. His example, 
while not imitated, was held in great esteem. In 
of MeS^^^ the eighth century St. Chrodegang, bishop of Metz, 
SB 6< wishing to reform and improve his clergy, assembled 
them about him, made a rule for them, and in- 
stituted the common life. The clergy belonging to the cathe- 
dral, and thus living together, formed the "chapter" of the 
cathedral, and generally had the management of its affairs and 
the election of the bishop in their hands. St. Chrodegang 
found imitators, and the clergy not only of the cathedrals but 



MONASTICISM i8i 

also of many parish churches soon began to live in the same 
way. It was one of the articles of the Cluniac programme 
that the clergy should be compelled to live in this monastic 
fashion, and under the influence of this reform party the 

movement took on large proportions. They imi- 
stratenskns!' tated the monks also in forming many orders, the 

most famous of which was that of the Premonstra- 
tensians. This order was founded about 1120 by St. Norbert, 
who soon became archbishop of Magdeburg, and who used the 
members of his order as missionaries among the Slavs to the 
east. All the clergy living thus according to a rule were called 
"regulars" (regtda), '^canons," or "regular canons" (canon, a 
Greek work meaning a "rule"), and as a body were known as 
the "regular clergy," a term which was sometimes used to in- 
clude the monks. There were many clergymen whose parishes 
were so remote from the cathedral or other large church that it 
was impossible for them to live in the houses of* the "regular 
clergy" and attend to their parish duties. Since they lived in 
the world (in scbcuIo) they were called by way of distinction 
the "secular clergy." 



CHAPTER X 
GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 

The efforts of Conrad I (911-918) to produce unity in Ger- 
many by making the royal power supreme had by their failure 
rather tended to make the disunion greater. The dukes, who 

were essentially tribal kings, had successfully re- 
Henry, the . ^ J , . \ . . ^, X.' c 

City Builder, sisted him and were exercismg the chief crown 
919-93 • rights {regalia). Both Bavarians and Suabians 
S. B., 26. seemed bent on securing complete independence, 

for, after Conrad's death, they would apparently 
have been content to let the office of king die out. At any 
rate they took no part in the election of his successor and were 
prepared to resist him, whoever he might be. Only two duchies, 
Franconia and Saxony, were represented in the election, which, 
according to the advice of Conrad, fell on Henry, duke of 
Saxony (called the "Fowler" and the "Builder of Cities," 919- 
936). Henry accepted the honor, but, as if to rebuke the clergy 
for their action at the council of Altheim (916), he refused to be 
anointed and crowned. His refusal was indicative of his con- 
ception of his office and of the attitude which he was going to 

assume toward his fellow dukes. He recognized 
King!^ that he was only a feudal king, chosen by his peers 

to be their overlord. He first led an army into 
Suabia and compelled its duke, Burchard, to become his vassal, 
but left in Burchard's hands the government of the duchy. 
He then proceeded against the duke of Bavaria, who was not 
willing to cede so much as had the duke of Suabia. Rather 
than engage in war with him Henry left him in possession of 
actual power, in return for which the duke took the oath of 
homage to Henry as overlord. 

Content with the somewhat equivocal position of a feudal 

182 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 183 

king, Henry returned to Saxony and devoted himself to the 
government of his own duchy. The fact that in his numerous 
wars he received no help from his vassal dukes is evidence that 
his control over them was very slight; but by his conciliatory 
policy toward them he disarmed their fears and so eventually 
established friendly relations with them. Certain circum- 
stances enabled him to increase his influence over them. He 
gave his daughter in marriage to the duke of Lotharingia, 
and, on the death of the duke of Suabia without heirs, he as- 
sumed the right to dispose of the vacant duchy and conferred 
it on one of his friends. Thus the dissolution of Germany into 
independent kingdoms, which was threatened under Ludwig 
the Child and Conrad I, was averted. 

For some years the Hungarians, or Magyars, a nomadic 
people occupying a vast stretch of territory southeast of Bo- 
hemia, had been ravaging neighboring lands almost at will. 

They invaded Saxony, too, and compelled Henry 

to make a nine years' truce with them, and to agree 
to pay them an annual tribute. The Saxons, who still fought 
on foot, were unable to compete with a mounted enemy. And, 
as they were generally accustomed to live in open villages, they 
had few places of refuge and their country was at the mercy 
of an invading army of excellent horsemen. Some of the 
bishops, however, had built walls about the towns that had 
grown up around their cathedrals, and monasteries were usually 
protected with walls. But these were not sufficiently numerous, 
nor were they within easy reach of all the people when attacked. 

Henry not only ordered some of the towns (Merse- 
Piaces. burg, Gandersheim, Essen, Goslar) to be surrounded 

SB 26 ^^^^ walls, but also raised a levy by taking one of 

every nine men and setting them at work upon the 
construction of fortified places at convenient distances from 
one another. He caused these places to be well stocked with 
provisions to withstand a siege, and, in order to accustom the 
people to them, he ordered that courts and public gatherings 
should be held in them. At the same time Henry, by training 
his Saxons to fight on horseback, was able to put an efficient 



i84 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

body of cavalry into the field and so to meet the invaders on 
equal terms. 

The wisdom of this change was soon apparent. At the ex- 
piration of the truce with the Hungarians they renewed their 
invasions, but Henry repulsed them with heavy losses. He 
also made some successful campaigns against the Slavs on the 
east, in consequence of which many tribes, including the Bo- 
hemians, became tributary to him.* It can hardly be said 
that Henry established a system of marches, or marks, be- 
tween the Saxons and the Slavs, although he organized the 
defense of the country by placing some counts on the frontier 
whose special duty it was to protect the country against Slavic 
invasions. 

At the death of Henry (936) the nobles of Franconia and 
Saxony came together and elected his oldest son. Otto (936- 
973). With this election Otto was not content. He caused 
Otto I ^^^ nobles of all Germany, both lay and ecclesias- 

936-973. tical, to be summoned to a general diet at Aachen, 
s. B., 27. for the purpose of electing a king. There the nobles, 

■' ^°^' who were present in great numbers, unanimously 

elected Otto, raised him to the throne, did him homage, and 
swore to be faithful to him and to aid him against all his enemies. 
He was then anointed and crowned with elaborate ceremony by 
the archbishops of Mainz, Cologne, and Treves. Otto's pride 
and love of pomp showed themselves in the coronation dinner. 
In order to heighten the dignity of the occasion, he revived 
the four chief offices of the royal household (chamberlain, sen- 
eschal, cup-bearer, marshal), and had their duties performed 
by the four dukes of Lotharingia, Franconia, Suabia, and Ba- 
varia. This was merely a matter of etiquette and had no politi- 
cal significance whatever. Three hundred years later the right 
to vote for the king was limited to the three archbishops above 
named and to the four men who held these offices, but until 

* Our word "slave" is derived from Slav, and got its meaning from 
the fact that so many Slavs were taken prisoners by the Germans and 
reduced to bondage that their racial name came to be app>lied to all 
bondmen. 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 185 

that time they were sinecures; except on rare state occasions 
the duties connected with them were always performed by 
others. 

The harmony exhibited at Aachen was of short duration. 
In all parts of the empire the nobles, regardless of their oaths 
of fidelity, rebelled and plotted against their overlord. Chief 
of these conspirators were Otto's brothers and the 
ofThe Nobles. ^^^^ dukes. Even his brothers tried to take his 
life, and for some time his position was insecure. 
He took advantage of vacancies in some of the duchies to put 
members of his family into them, and he sought to bind the 
other dukes to himself by marriages. But this policy can hardly 
be said to have been successful, since members of his own 
family were quite as faithless to him as were others. It would 
be idle to attempt to follow in detail all the local rebellions and 
conspiracies with which he had to contend during his reign. 
He was universally successful in suppressing them, although 
he was never able to bring his vassals to such a degree of sub- 
mission that they did not dare renew their rebellion. 
Counlt.^^^ I^ order to keep a check on the dukes Otto es- 
tablished in each duchy a royal ofi&cial, who was 
known as a ''count of the palace" (palatine count) to safe- 
guard all the king's interests. However, as the king paid him 
in land, he soon became a great landholder and vassal, bent on 
his own aggrandizement at the expense of the king. It was 
characteristic of the Middle Age that no ruler was able to 
retain the faithful and unselfish service of his officials and 
vassals. 

The king's income was derived from a great variety of sources. 
From his family (ducal) lands in Saxony, and from the crown 
lands, which were extensive but scattered throughout the 
kingdom, he received a large income, chiefly in the 
Income?^ ^ natural products of the soil. As king he possessed 
certain crown rights {regalia) which were important 
though subsidiary sources of revenue; thus, he received a share 
of, and in some cases all, the fines that were assessed in the 
administration of justice; the same is true of the tolls that 



i86 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

were levied in various parts of the kingdom; the right of coin- 
age was his; all mines were the property of the king (during 
the eleventh century salt-works were included with the mines) ; 
he had a right to a tax on the goods sold in all the markets or 
fairs of the kingdom, and of the fines assessed on all offenders 
during the continuance of the markets. In addition to these 
regalian rights, it was the custom for the nobles to give him 
valuable gifts whenever they came to him. These, with the 
ordinary feudal dues which he might collect from his vassals, 
and the annual tribute paid by peoples who had been con- 
quered, amounted altogether to a considerable sum. His 
numerous campaigns cost him little, because his vassals were 
bound to support themselves in the field; it was for this that 
they had received their lands from the king. 

The presence of barbarian peoples along the whole eastern 
frontier was a constant menace to the kingdom. Danes, Slavs 
(Poles, Bohemians, and many others), and Hungarians, made 
frequent invasions, during which they sacked and 
of^Germany. burned churches, monasteries, and villages, and car- 
ried off a great many prisoners. Otto recognized 
it as his first duty to conquer these pagan neighbors, to subject 
them to Germany, and to Christianize them. To this end he 
made many campaigns against them, established in suitable 
places archbishops, bishops, and colonies of monks, who should 
act as missionaries to the pagan peoples in question, and or- 
ganized a defense which is generally known as a ''mark" system. 
He divided the debatable land between them and 
Sysl;em. ^^ ^he Germans into districts which were called marches 
or marks (i. e., border-lands), and put over each of 
them an official called a margrave (marquis, border count). 
To the margrave was intrusted the protection of the kingdom 
against invasions and the extension of its frontier to the east 
by conquest. By the time of Otto's death (973) the whole 
eastern frontier had been organized into a system of marks, 
which extended from the North Sea to the Adriatic. Against 
the Danes he erected the mark of Holstein, and established 
bishops at Schleswig, Ripen, and Aarhus, putting them under 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 187 

the archbishop of Bremen-Hamburg.* Sclavania, the border- 
land between the Germans and Slavs north of the Bohemians, 
he divided into six marks: the mark of Hermann Billung (along 
the Baltic), the north mark, the mark of Lausitz, and the marks 
of Merseburg, Zeitz, and Meissen. For conducting missionary 
work among the Slavs Otto established an archbishop at Mag- 
deburg! (968), and bishops at Brandenburg, Havelberg, Merse- 
burg, Zeitz, and Meissen. He conquered the Bohemians and 
reduced their duke to vassalage. Against the Hungarians, 
upon whom he inflicted an overwhelming defeat on the Lech- 
feld (a plain on the Lech River, near Augsburg, 955), he created 
the east mark, which eventually became Austria. 

S. B., 28. 

And finally, against the Slavs on the upper waters 
of the Drave and Save Rivers, and against Italy, there were 
the marks of Carinthia (Kaernthen) and Friuli. Through these 
marks the forces of barbarism were gradually won over to the 
cause of civilization. 

Toward the middle of the tenth century Otto held the cen- 
tral position on the political stage of Europe. His friendship 
was sought by the king of the West Franks as well as by Hugh 

Capet, the chief of the rebellious Frankish nobles. 
Italy. ^" The young king of Burgundy fled to Otto to escape 

the machinations of his enemies, and after he re- 
turned to his kingdom in security (943) he retained a grateful 
remembrance of Otto's goodness to him. In like manner, 
Berengar, who had a hereditary claim on the Italian crown, 
fled for refuge to Otto (940), at whose court he spent the next 

* In 983 Hamburg was destroyed by the Slavs, and its archbishop 
was driven out. Since the city remained desolate for some time, he 
could not return thither. In the meantime he established himself at 
Bremen. Hence writers sometimes call him the archbishop of Bremen. 
To avoid confusion we have combined the names. 

t About 954 Otto had proposed to raise Magdeburg to an archbish- 
opric, but was unable to do so because of the opposition of the arch- 
bishop of Mainz, in whose archdiocese Magdeburg was situated. 
Although Otto twice secured the consent of the pope to this arrangement, 
the resistance of the archbishop of Mainz prevented him frohi carrying 
it into effect. The death of the archbishop in 968 gave Otto the oppor- 
tunity which he had so long desired, and the change was made before 
another archbishop was appointed. 



i88 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

five years. And both the pope and the Italian nobles, when 
endangered, naturally turned to Otto for help. The manner 
in which Otto was drawn into the affairs of Italy has already 
been narrated in connection with the account of the dissolution 
of the empire of Charlemagne. Berengar, the king of Italy, 
took Spoleto and threatened to deprive the pope, John XII, 
of his independence.* Consequently, John appealed to Otto 
for protection, and in return promised him the imperial crown. 
At the same time some Italian nobles, offended at the vigorous 
manner in which Berengar was exercising his royal authority, 
also called upon Otto for aid. Inasmuch as Otto desired the 
imperial title, he gladly accepted the invitation to interfere in 
Italian affairs. He was received in Rome with 

Crowned . / \ ttti i 

Emperor, great joy and crowned emperor (962). When he 
^ ^' attempted, however, to exercise the authority of his 

s. B., 29. j^g^ office, he offended both the pope and the nobles. 

R., 104. ' ^ ^ 

In the end Otto deposed John XII and put another 
pope, Leo VIII, in his place. He also compelled the Romans 
to swear that they would not elect and consecrate a pope with- 
out first obtaining his consent. Since Berengar possessed the 
dangerous ambition of ruling all Italy and refused to submit, 
Otto seized him and carried him off to Germany, where he was 
kept a prisoner to the time of his death. 

A rebellion in Rome against the pope (967) recalled Otto to 
Italy, where he spent the next five years in a serious effort to 
establish his authority in southern Italy, which, he contended, 

was a part of his empire. He made several cam- 
ideas"^ paigns against the Greeks, who still held all of the 

peninsula south of Benevento and Capua. Un- 
fortunately, he had conceived the idea that it would increase 
the prestige of his family and be more in keeping with his posi- 
tion as emperor if he should marry his son to a Greek princess. 
At first his proposal was rejected, but in 969 a rebellion in the 
Greek palace at Constantinople was successful, and the new 
emperor was more condescending. Knowing how eager Otto 

* The position of Berengar in 961 was much like that of Aistulf in 
750 and that of Desiderius in 773. 



I 



Note to Map VII. — By the coronation of Otto the Great as emperor (962), 
the empire of Lothar (with the exception of the Rhone valley) and the king- 
dom of Ludwig the German (see Map VI) [were reunited. The two king- 
doms of Upper and Lower Burgundy, which occupied the Rhone valley, 
united in 934 to form the kingdom of Aries or Burgundy (see Map VIII), 
which in turn was united to the empire in 1032. Otto I labored to extend 
his realm at the expense of the barbarians on the east, who were now forming 
states. The territory between the Elbe and the Oder was organized into 
marks (mark of the Billunger, as the family of the Billungs was called, north 
mark, and the marks of Lausitz, Meissen, and Zeitz) and slowly germanized 
and christianized. The east mark was enlarged. After his imperial corona- 
tion Otto assumed that southern Italy belonged to him and tried to exercise 
authority over it. In this he was only partially successful, for the extreme 
southern part still remained subject to the Greek emperor. 

The Slavs are just beginning to have a sort of political existence in the 
states of Pomerania, Prussia, Poland, Croatia, Servia, and Bulgaria, all of 
which states had a very primitive, simple, and loosely organized govern- 
ment. The Hungarians were taking their first lessons in civilization, hav- 
ing just abandoned their nomadic life. 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 189 

was for the alliance, he demanded the cession of all southern 
Italy in return for the princess. Otto was willing to pay the 
price, and the contract was concluded on these terms. The 
princess, Theophano, was sent to Italy and was married to 
the young prince, Otto II, in St. Peter's (972). 

Long befor ) his death Otto had aken care to secure the suc- 
cession for his family. In 961 he had caused his first son. 
Otto II, to be crowned king of Germany, and in 967 he was 
P equally successful in having the pope crown him 

Rebellions of as emperor. The death of Otto in 973 caused no 
interruption, therefore, in the administration of the 
government. The history of the emperors* for the next hun- 
dred years may be treated in a summary manner. In Ger- 
many there was an unceasing round of plots and rebellions on 
the part of the nobles, which prevented the country from arriv- 
ing at the full benefits of peace. The king could maintain his 
authority only by constant fighting. The resentful attitude of 
the people toward the central government was invincible, and 
encouraged the nobles, whose ambition needed no stimulus, 
to renew their efforts to throw off the king's yoke. The king's 
work was never done, because the rebels, when defeated, yielded 
only for the moment, and at the first opportunity sought more 
powerful allies for their next uprising. On the whole, however, 
it can be said that toward the end of this period the power of 
the king increased, and that the rebellions diminished in both 
frequency and strength. It was a misfortune for Germany 
that its king was also emperor, because the duties of his office 
frequently called him to Italy and the nobles invariably took 
advantage of his absence to rebel. 

The numerous journeys of the German kings into Italy 

* Otto II, 973-983, Otto III, 983-1002. Since Otto III died child- 
less, the direct Saxon line ended with him. Civil war broke out be- 
tween opposing candidates, but in the end Henry II (1002-1624, duke 
of Bavaria, and a distant relative of Otto III) secured the election and 
overcame all who opposed him. He also died childless. Conrad II 
(1024- 1 039) of Franconia was then elected, and he was succeeded by 
his son, Henry III (1039-1056). Under his son and successor, Henry 
IV (1056-H06), the great struggle betweeA the empire aiid the papacy 
began. 



I90 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

brought heavy disasters to Germany on the eastern frontier, 

where both Slavs and Hungarians were eagerly watching for 

an opportunity to throw off the German yoke. 

Germany . i . i i i 

Suffers when While Otto II was chasmg the shadow of imperial 
go\o itaiy^'^^ sovereignty in Italy, the Slavs revolted and invaded 
^, „ Germany with overwhelming forces. The German 

O. -D.J 32> 

nobles, weakened by feuds and the absence of many 
of their number, who had accompanied the emperor into Italy, 
were unable to stand before them. The whole border-land was 
devastated, the bishops driven from their seats, churches and 
monasteries destroyed, the German colonists either killed or 
expelled, and the mark system inaugurated by Otto I swept 
away. The German frontier, which had been advanced by 
the arms of Henry I and Otto I and by the missionary labors 
of bishops and monks, receded, and the most zealous efforts of 
all the kings for more than a hundred years were hardly suffi- 
cient to recover the ground lost during the reign of Otto 11. 
The expansion of Germany to the east, thus temporarily 
checked, was rendered almost impossible for some time to 
come by two events which must now be described: the Poles 
acquired ecclesiastical independence, and the Hungarians, 
breaking the ties that bound them to the empire, became sub- 
ject to the pope. In the first place Otto III, in the 

The Polish *' ^ . t^ , i ., • 

Church year looo, went to Gnesen m Poland, on a pilgrim- 

oJcrrmar*" ^ge to the grave of his friend, Adalbert of Prague," 
Influence, y^\^Q j^^^j suffered martyrdom as a missionary among 
the Poles. At that time. Otto III, under the stress 
of extravagant ideas, had lost his mental equilibrium, and with 
it a sane view and Judgment of political matters. Incapable of 
foreseeing the consequences of his act, he made Gnesen the seat 
of an archbishop and established seven suffragan bishops in 
its archdiocese, which was made at the expense of the arch- 
bishop of Magdeburg. The German clergy who had begun 
the work of Christianizing the Poles were displaced by Polish 
clergy, and Poland, having an ecclesiastical organization of its 
own, was freed from German influence and its independent 
national existence was thereby secured. The duke of Poland 
remained nominally the vassal of Otto III, but, backed by the 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 191 

church and by the growing racial sentiment of the Poles, he 
inevitably tended toward independence. The process of Ger- 
manizing the Poles w^as stopped, and Poland, instead of being 
made a part of Germany, became merely a vassal state, the 
complete independence of which could not long be prevented. 

After the decisive defeat of the Hungarians by Otto I (955), 
they retired to the territory which they still occupy and grad- 
ually gave up their nomadic habits. German missionaries 

planted Christianity among them, and at the same 
Hungarians time German colonists settled among them. Their 
the Pope.^ territory was regarded as a part of the archdiocese of 

the archbishop of Salzburg, and their ecclesiastical 

dependence on Germany was naturally bringing 
about their political dependence too. They, like the Poles, were 
beginning to be Germanized. In the year 1000, however, their 
duke offered his territory to the pope as the representative of St. 
Peter, and received it back as a papal fief, and with it the title of 
king. At the same time the pope gave Hungary an independent 
ecclesiastical organization by establishing an archbishop in Gran. 
Ecclesiastical independence and the royal title together put an 
end to German influence. Successive kings of Germany made 
war on Hungary, and more than once compelled its king to 
take the oath of vassalage. But this was contrary to the papal 
claims, and Hungary, in fact, maintained its independence of 
Germany. 

The events of the year 1000 put an effectual barrier in the 
way of the conquest and Germanizing of Poland and Hungary. 
The mountains which surround Bohemia checked the advance 
Independence ^^ ^^^ Germans in that direction also. The duke 
of Poland and of the Bohemians frequently took the oath of vas- 
and the ' salage to the German king, but was practically inde- 
around^^^^ pendent of him. Only along the Baltic there was 
Ch^^k"^ no barrier to German expansion, but during "ffis 
German period little or nothing was done there. The kings 

of Germany, having become involved in struggles 
with the Hungarians, Bohemians, and Poles, expended all their 
energies there, leaving the conquest of the north Slavs to later 
generations. If Otto III had acted with a wise and intelligent 



192 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

regard for the political interests of Germany, he would not have 

permitted the Poles and Hungarians to free themselves from 

German influence, and the expansion of Germany to the east 

might have gone on for some centuries. 

On the southwest Germany received a large and important 

addition in the kingdom of Burgundy. Its last king, Rudolf 

III, being childless, made his friend, Henry II of Germany, 

his heir. After Henry's death (1024) Rudolf con- 
Burgundy . 1 1 • r • n 1 • • 1 i-i 

Added to tmued his friendly relations with Conrad II. Con- 
1032."^^^'^^' sequently when Rudolf died (1032) Conrad II 
g g claimed the kingdom. He was successful in causing 

himself to be elected by some of the nobles and 
crowned king of Burgundy, but he had to fight for the posses- 
sion of the kingdom. A certain Burgundian count, Odo, cov- 
eted the crown, and many of the nobles supported him. Two 
vigorous campaigns were necessary to reduce the nobles to 
subjection and to establish Conrad II securely in possession 
of the land. 

Especially in Italy did the German emperor encounter diffi- 
culties, for, after asserting his authority over the Italian nobles 
and cities, he had also to contend with the Greeks. In spite of 

the fact that Otto I had surrendered the imperial 
the Greeks claim to southern Italy (972), his successors renewed 
itafy^^^^'^" it. In support of it they were compelled to make 

frequent campaigns into that part of the peninsula, 
most of which were disastrous failures. They clashed there 
also with the Mohammedans, who, after taking possession of 
the islands, had established themselves in various places on 
the mainland. Greeks and Mohammedans even united to re- 
sist the Germans, their common foe. Under these circum- 
stances the cities of southern Italy frequently changed their 
overlords. If the Greeks were successful, the cities obeyed 
them; if the Mohammedans were victorious, the cities paid 
them tribute; and wherever the German emperor appeared, the 
cities acknowledged him. ^ 

While Germans, Greeks, and Mohammedans were battling 
for the possession of southern Italy, a few hardy soldiers of 
fortune appeared on the scene, and in a short time cleared the 






Note to Map VIII. — This map shows the kingdom of Burgundy as it was 
in 1032, when it was annexed to the empire. Geographically and linguisti- 
cally it belonged to France, to which most of it eventually came; the rest 
of it went to Switzerland (compare this map with a map of modern France 
and Switzerland) . It is worthy of note that Cluny , the home of the Cluniac 
revival, and the "Grande Chartreuse," the monastery in which the Carthu- 
sian Order had its origin, were in Burgundy, while Citeaux, the mother 
monastery of the Cistercian Order, was just beyond its boundary, only a 
few miles from Cluny. The northern part of the kingdom came to be 
called the free county of Burgundy (Franche Comte, see Map XV), and 
formed a part of the possessions of Charles the Bold of Burgundy (see Map 
XVI). For the various meanings of the word Burgundy in the Middle Age, 
see Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, Appendix A. 





16 8 


"" 




1 ■ " '' ' 

vm 










KINGDOM OF BURGUNDY k / 


A 




48 


~ 


f A »^Tr -m->/-4 \ ^ A^^^^ ^"J 


^^ \ - 


18 


[ARLES) 1032 F 


: V 1 






J rvf- 


\ /.Basel 


.^ r 






/ r 








r^ Besiu 


son ^ ^^^ 








Crteaux. / 1 


Grandsom--«^ 'Muiten 
^ f 


>-> 










,y 








■*^ iClunV ^V 


l^ausanne 








\___y ^ / Macon 
1 f^J ^^ 


Geneva VB^'^ 






16 








f 


16 




\ 1 — 


.*»- 






o 
















w 








( \\ \ A/ 


"v 










> ^ \i Yifenne 


^.-.^- 








^ 










ide Cliaiti'eirse Z^*"' 








r 


-.r^" ^ 


~ ^ 






( 


*-x V 


^--^^ ( 








< V 


\ /"Valence 




-^ 






^ N 


^ U t( A 


L Y) 










^ *^ ) 










y 


X r-J / '^ 








P5 


*§\. Orange \ 


, — ^ > / 


/" 




11 




^^V J 


i 


--+ — 


11 


^ 


J^AvigDOu / 


i 


>^ 






J ^^ *v 


i .,«««»**^ 


•f 










Nice Z^***^*^ 










/H» Aries *^2eF~^^-w^ 


s'^*^'^ 








^' 


J \ ^^ ^ 


r^ 








X 




^ 










^\r' 


s 








^ 


^ T E R R 


. >- ^ ' 






1 Longitude East 6 from Greenwich 8 | 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 193 

field of all contestants and made themselves master of it. The 
romantic story of the establishment of a Norman state in 

southern Italy has often been told. In 1016 a band 
inTtaly!^ of about forty Norman knights, returning from a 

pilgrimage to Jerusalem, landed at Salerno, which 
was at that time besieged by Mohammedans. With the help 
of the Normans, Waimar, the prince of Salerno, defeated the 
Mohammedans and drove them off. Waimar tried in vain to 
engage these knights to remain with him, and, when they set 
out for Normandy, he sent ambassadors with them, who per- 
suaded other Normans to enter his service. In return for their 
help Waimar invested one of them with Aversa and the title 
of count. Other Normans, seeking their fortune, also came. 
Some of them became vassals of Conrad II and agreed to defend 
the frontier of the empire. In 1041 they joined a certain Arduin 
— a Lombard count who wished to avenge himself on the 
Greeks for an injury they had done him — in a successful war on 
the Greek possessions in Apulia. Arduin kept half of the con- 
quered territory and divided the rest into twelve counties, 
which he gave to the Normans for their pay. To these posses- 
sions they added by conquest until they held about all of 
southern Italy. They even submitted temporarily to the Ger- 
man emperor, for in 1047 Count Drogo did homage to Henry 
III and received from him Apulia as a iief. Nothing seems to 
have come of this, however, for there is no evidence that Drogo 
performed the duties incumbent on him as a vassal of the em- 
pire. With reckless disregard of the rights of others the Nor- 
mans continued, like true soldiers of fortune, to make them- 
selves master of all the cities and territories of southern Italy. 
Soon they attacked the lands of the pope. In 1053 Leo IX, with 
the help of German troops, made a campaign against them, but 

was defeated and made prisoner by them. They 
Guiscard treated him with the greatest respect, however, fell 
Dake, 1059. ^^ his feet, and begged him to accept them as vas- 
g g g sals. This Leo refused to do, but in 1059 Pope 

Nicholas II yielded and conferred upon their count, 
Robert Guiscard, the title of duke of Apulia, Calabria, and 
"Sicily, if he should by the grace of God get possession of it," 



194 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and received his homage. The pope had no legal claim to all 
the lands which he thus gave away, but, as the emperor was a 
mere child, there was no one to oppose his action. Southern 
Italy had been so often conquered and lost that all legal claims 
on it seemed to have been destroyed; it was only a bit of prey, 
belonging to any one who was lucky enough to get it. At the 
moment it belonged to the Normans by the right of conquest, 
and, as neither the Greeks nor the Germans were able to sub- 
stantiate their claims, the pope no doubt felt himself justified 
in assuming the overlordship of it and in saving as much as 
possible from the general wreckage caused by the long wars 
among the Greeks, Germans, Mohammedans, and Normans.* 

The emperors of this period, without exception, exercised the 
same unlimited control of the pope and papacy as had Otto I. 
And, like him, they were frequently called on to free the pope 

* The following details may throw some light on the conflicting im- 
perial and papal claims in southern Italy. In 1050 it is said that Leo 
IX went into southern Italy and persuaded some cities to render him 
an oath of homage. This of course did not interfere with the fact 
that the pope was subject to the German emperor. In 1051 the people 
of Benevento expelled their duke and offered to submit to Leo IX. 
He accordingly went to Benevento and received their submission. 
Since their duke was a vassal of the German emperor and their city 
an imperial fief, it would logically follow that the pope merely took the 
place of their duke, and was, therefore, subject to the emperor. Henry 
III was not inclined to leave Benevento in the hands of Leo, because 
it was an imperial fief. However, in 1053 Henry yielded and granted 
Benevento to the pope in exchange for some papal possessions in Ger- 
many. The emperor, of course, still possessed imperial sovereignty 
over Benevento. Henry HI was a warm personal friend of Pope 
Victor II (1054-1057), and granted him for his lifetime the duchy of 
Spoleto and the county of Fermo. At the death of Victor these 
should have reverted to the emperor, but, in the disorders attending the 
regency of Henry IV, the imperial claims to them were not pressed and, 
the popes retaining them, the papal claim to them was soon established. 
These facts give some basis for the action of Nicholas II in 1059. O" 
the other hand, Henry HI in 1047 became the feudal lord of the Norman 
count, Drogo, and invested him with Apulia; and at the same time he 
enfeoffed Waimar of Salerno with his lands; and, as the Normans were 
the vassals of Waimar, they would be the subvassals of the emperor. 
Out of these relations the emperor could claim that the lands which 
the pope received in 1059 were really his own, because he had once 
possessed them and had never alienated them. 




12 Longitude H East fiom 16 Greenwich 



18 



IX 

THE NORMAN KINGDOM OF SICILY 

Established 1130 

Note to Map IX. — The kingdom of the Normans was named after Sicily, 
although their possessions on the mainland were greater in extent than 
Sicily. It is an excellent example of a kingdom built up by conquest. 
The Normans conquered the independent cities in southern Italy as well 
as those provinces which were still subject to the Greek emperor, and 
then took Sicily from the Mohammedans. Both the Greek and German 
emperors claimed all this territory' and refused to recognize the vaUdity 
of the Norman title. Henry VI of Germany (1190-1197) got possession 
of it by marriage and conquest. Toward the end of the thirteenth century 
Sicily was separated from the mainland, but both parts were still called 
the "kingdom of Sicily." When they were reunited they were generally 
spoken of as the "kingdom of the two Sicilies." 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 195 

from the tyranny of some Roman faction. Both Otto III and 
Henry II had to use force against the Crescentius family, which 
rpj^g for several years was dominant in Rome. The 

Emperors head of this family controlled the successive popes 
Popes. and filled the office with his supporters. The papacy 

s. B., 52, 55. suffered still more when another powerful family 
Th Pa acv ^^^^e in Rome, and factions were formed which 
a Local fought for the control of the office. In 1046 there 

were three popes contending for the place, and 
Three Popes, jjg^ry III was called into Italy to put an end to 
this scandalous state of affairs. The Romans, offended by the 
vices of Benedict IX, a creature of the Tusculan family, ex- 
pelled him from the city, and elected another pope, Silvester 
III. Benedict IX was restored by force for a while, but sold 
the office to another member of his family, who took the title 
Gregory VI. Benedict still called himself pope, however. 
Henry III held councils at Sutri and Rome (1046), 
Deposes and in which he deposed all three claimants and then 
Popes.^^^ appointed a worthy man to the office. So long as 
Henry III lived the Romans did not attempt to 
elect a pope without first consulting him, and he 
named not less than four popes. Europe was, however, at 
that time becoming imbued with the spirit of Cluny, and al- 
ready there were heard voices of protest against the influence 
of laymen in filling ecclesiastical offices. 

The action of Leo IX (1048- 1054) was indicative of the 
change that was going on. He refused the appointment at the 
hands of Henry III, but said that he was willing to accept a 
canonical election at the hands of the Romans. 
(1048-1054) He entered the city in the garb of a penitent and 
Pope!^^^^^^ was hailed with joy by the Romans, who unani- 
mously elected him. With him the papacy — for 
some time a local political office, whose power was scarcely felt 
beyond the walls of Rome — again became a universal office, 
conscious of its world-wide authority and its duties to the whole 
church. He travelled through Italy, France, and Germany, 
holding councils and regulating ecclesiastical matters. Every- 



196 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

where he successfully asserted his authority and broke down 
the independence of the high clergy, who had almost forgotten 
that the headship of the church belonged to the pope. He 
made Hildebrand, a monk of Cluny and the embodiment of its 
spirit, his chief adviser. And under his successors Hildebrand 
continued to be the power behind the papal throne, until he 
'himself was raised to the chair of St. Peter as Gregory VII 

(1073)- 

The danger which threatened the papal office from the fac- 
tions in Rome was not yet entirely removed. At the death of 
Pope Stephen IX (1058) the Tusculan party took advantage 
of the absence of Hildebrand from the city — he was 
Decree of Still in Germany, whither he had gone to secure the 
1059°^^ ' sanction of the empress for the election of Stephen 

„ „ IX — to elect one of their own number. On hear- 

S. B., 59. 

ing of this Hildebrand returned in great haste, 
called a few of the cardinals together, elected another pope, 
Nicholas II, and succeeded in having him universally recognized. 
In order to free the papacy from this danger, Hildebrand saw 
that it was necessary to deprive all laymen of a share in the 
papal election. Accordingly, in 1059, Nicholas II published a 
papal election decree, which took the election of the pope from 
the clergy and people of Rome, and put it wholly into the 
hands of the cardinal clergy of the city. By the terms of this 
decree the seven cardinal bishops should choose the pope, and 
the rest of the cardinal clergy should confirm their election.* 

* The term "cardinal" (chief, or principal) was early applied to the 
parish priests and to a few deacons connected with ancient ecclesiastical 
establishments in Rome, and to seven bishops in the neighborhood of 
the city (Palaestrina, Porto, Ostia, Tusculum, Silva Candida, AlbanO, 
and the Sabine territory). These seven bishops aided the bishop of 
Rome, representing him in his absence and assisting him in all important 
functions, such as the coronation of the emperor (cf. S. B., 34). The 
election decree of Nicholas greatly increased the honor of their title 
and the importance of their position. Their influence was still further 
enhanced by Gregory VII, who used them constantly as his legates to 
all parts of the Christian world. The title "cardinal," because of the 
honor attaching to it, was soon sought after by other clergymen. Pope 
Alexander III (11 59-1 181) is said to have been the first to confer it 
on one who did not live in Rome, and it then became an important 



GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE, 919-1056 197 

The election decree of 1059 met with sharp opposition in 

Germany. The empress, Agnes, who was regent for her little 

son, Henry IV, was offended by it as well as by the fact that 

Nicholas II had become the feudal lord of southern 

German 

Opposition to Italy and Sicily, thus infringing upon the rights of 

tli6 Decree 

the emperor. She called together the German 
bishops, who not only rejected the decree but even declared 
Nicholas deposed. They took no steps, however, to make 
their deposition effective. In a short time Nicholas died, and 
Hildebrand, without consulting the empress, brought about the 
election of Alexander II. Angered by this, Agnes refused to 
recognize Alexander and set up an antipope. Although she 
soon deserted him, he continued, nevertheless, for some years 
to bear the papal title. This heated but brief quarrel was only 

a prelude to the great struggle that was soon to 
Situation begin. For the papacy, so long subject to the em- 
Sfe'pamcy ^ perors and a prey to the factions in Rome, was now 

in a position to dispute with the emperors for the 

supremacy of the world. The Cluniac reform had prepared the 

mind of Europe to welcome the theory of papal supremacy and 

all the corollaries that could be drawn from it. The ''empire of 

souls" was undoubtedly superior to the ''empire of bodies," 

and hence the pope was superior to the emperor. To most 

people such reasoning seemed incontrovertible. For the first 

time in its history the papacy was free from lay interference. 

The pope, who was the temporal lord of central and southern 

Italy, was in possession of strong temporal forces with which 

to support his claims. His Norman vassals, though turbulent 

and often rebellious, were nevertheless to be his best supporters 

in his struggle with the emperors. On the other hand, the 

way of recognizing pre-eminent worth in a clergyman to confer upon 
him the title of cardinal, connecting him nominally with one of the 
parish churches of Rome. Thus the present Cardinal Archbishop 
Gibbons, of Baltimore, is the cardinal priest of St. Mary's beyond the 
Tiber, one of the oldest and most interesting churches of Rome. In 
1586 it was decreed that the number of cardinal titles should not exceed 
seventy, of which six might be bishops, fifty priests, and fourteen deacons. 
But this decree is not now strictly observed, for in 1902 the college of 
cardinals consisted of six bishops, fifty-two priests, and eight deacons. 



igS EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

position of the king in Germany was weak, because Henry III 
had enriched the high clergy but had offended them by his 
strict control of them, the nobles were rebellious, and the 
Saxons were, as usual, disaffected, and hence could easily be 
drawn to the side of the pope. To make matters worse for the 
empire, Henry III had died at the height of his power (1056), 
leaving his son six years old to succeed him. The situation 
was in every way favorable to the papacy. 



CHAPTER XI 

THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN PAPACY AND EMPIRE. 
THE FIRST PERIOD (1073 TO 1152) 

Henry III, at his death (1056), left his little son, Henry IV, 
in an unfortunate position. The nobles of Germany, offended 
by the strong and independent rule of Henry III, longed for 
Henry IV ^^ Opportunity to exercise their lawless and pred- 
and His atory instincts. Consequently the accession of 

a child under the regency of his mother, Agnes, a 

■' ^°'^' weak and vacillating woman, was the signal for the 

beginning of feuds in all parts of the country. Agnes was un- 
able to check the feuds or to punish the offenders. Unable to 
form a plan of action, she fluttered from one counsellor to an- 
other, always dominated by the one who had advised her last. 
After enduring her helpless indecision for six years. Anno the 
archbishop of Cologne, Otto duke of Bavaria, and Count Ecbert 
of Brunswick determined to displace her. They decoyed the 
young king on board a boat on the Rhine and hastily set out 
for Cologne. Discovering their intention, Henry, fearing for 
his life, leaped overboard and would have drowned but for the 
heroic efforts of Ecbert. Agnes complained of this act of vi- 
olence, but helplessly resigned her regency. 

Unfortunately Henry soon fell under the influence of Adal- 
bert, the ambitious and scheming archbishop of Bremen- 
Hamburg. To the ill advice of Adalbert can be traced the 
worst misfortunes of his reign. It was due to the 

Evil . 

Influence of archbishop that Henry became involved in a quarrel 
with Otto duke of Bavaria, and with Magnus duke 

thrsSons ^^ Saxony. And out of this quarrel came the long 
and disastrous wars with the people of those duchies. 

The Saxons were already in a rebellious frame of mind, because 

(i) Henry IV had built a palace in Goslar, a Saxon city, in whicn 

199 



200 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

he spent much of his time. His constant presence there was 
obnoxious to the Saxons because of the heavy demands which 
he made on them for the support of his household. (2) Henry 
had also built a number of fortresses in Saxony, in order, as 
the Saxons declared, to reduce them to slavery. (3) The 
Saxons were offended because Henry had garrisoned his for- 
tresses, and even the chief fortresses of the Saxon ducal family, 
with his ministerials,* who treated the Saxons with wanton 
violence and insolence. Added to all these grievances was the 
harsh treatment given their duke, which so enraged them that 
they rebelled. 

The rebellion began in 1073, and as Henry's vassals refused 
to come at his call, the Saxons quickly compelled him to sub- 
mit to their terms. They demanded that their duke be re- 
stored to his duchy, that the king's fortresses in 
Rebel.^^°°^ Saxony be destroyed, that all who had taken part 
in the rebellion be pardoned, and that Otto of Nord- 
heim be restored to the duchy of Bavaria. The Saxons pro- 
ceeded to destroy the fortresses, the most hated of which was 
the Harzburg, a powerful fortress which Henry had built on a 
northern spur of the Harz Mountains. The peasants of the 
neighborhood, in venting their rage on this, burned the church 
and desecrated the graves of the brother and infant son of 
Henry by scattering their bones on the ground. Enraged at 
this, Henry renewed the war and called on the pope to punish 
all who were guilty of this sacrilege. In this war Henry was 
successful, and the Saxons, though more bitter than ever, were 
compelled to submit. Unfortunately Henry had not learned 

* The king, as well as all the great nobles, In need of household ser- 
vants and attendants, had chosen the best of their young serfs, brought 
them into their palaces, and trained them for their new duties. These 
servants came to form a class by themselves and were called minis- 
terials. Some of them, equipped with weapons and mounted on horse- 
back, served their lord as a body-guard. Because they fought on horse- 
back they came to form a lower rank of nobility. The kings made use 
of their ministerials also to assist them in the administration of the 
government. The proud Saxons were indignant that the king put his 
ministerials, men of unfree condition, over them. See S. B., 296, 297, 
for an account of th^ rrjinisteriab, 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 201 

moderation, but added to the humiliation and resentment of 
the Saxons by ostentatiously rebuilding the destroyed fortresses. 
The Saxons therefore eagerly sought an opportunity to renew 
their rebellion. This they found when Henry became involved 
in a quarrel with the pope, Gregory VII. 

The question at issue in this struggle between empire and 
papacy, which began with Henry IV and continued at inter- 
vals and under various forms during the Middle Age, must 
first of all be made clear. The emperor, as we have 

The Issue 

between Seen, regarded himself as the divinely appointed 

Papacy possessor of universal political sovereignty, which 

necessarily included the control of the church. 
Gregory VII (1073-1085) entered the lists with the counter- 
claim that he was the divinely appointed possessor of universal 
ecclesiastical sovereignty, which necessarily included the con- 
trol of all states and governments. This, the question of sover- 
eignty, was and remained the fundamental question; all other 
questions were merely symptoms of it. 

The papal claims to sovereignty are expressed in the famous 
Dictatus papce, which, although not written by Gregory, con- 
tains his fundamental principles. According to this document 

the pope is the only bishop who may be called uni- 
ciauns^^ versal and apostolic (paragraphs 2, 11). He is the 
Dictatus supreme lawgiver of the church, having exclusive 

Papce. right to call councils and to ratify their actions 

s. B., 65. (paragraphs 7, 16, 17, 18). He is the supreme judge 
R.', 109. ^ ^^^ church, to whom all cases may be appealed 

(paragraphs 19, 20, 21). He has also the supreme 
executive power, having the right to depose, to reinstate, and 
to transfer all clergymen as he will, and to erect new bishoprics 
as seems best to him (paragraphs 3, 5, 7, 13, 25). As universal 
bishop he has the whole world for his diocese, in which he may 
perform all episcopal functions without any regard to the local 
bishop. That is, his authority in every diocese is superior to 
that of the local bishop (paragraphs 14, 15). Nor are his politi- 
cal powers less sweeping. He is the possessor of all temporal 
power, for he alone has the right to use the imperial insignia 



202 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

(crown, sceptre, ornaments of dress; cf. the Donation of Con- 
stantine). That is, he has the right, by conferring these insignia ^ 
to appoint the emperor and, by withdrawing them, to depose 
him (paragraphs 8, 12). All temporal rulers and princes must 
acknowledge his supremacy by kissing his foot — an act sym- 
bolic of complete subjection (paragraph 9). He has the right 
to absolve subjects from the oath of fidelity which they have 
sworn to their lord, and to command them to make formal 
charges against their rulers (paragraphs 24, 27). His decrees 
are binding on all alike, and neither emperor nor king may annul 
them (paragraph 18). These powers are based on three things: 
(i) the divine origin of the church of Rome, by which is meant 
the papacy (paragraph i); (2) the infallibility of the same, 
since it has never erred and never will err (paragraph 22); 
and (3) the holy character of each individual pope, which is 
conferred on him by his ordination (paragraph 23). 

There is no doubt that Gregory VII acted according to the 
principles expressed in the Dictatus. Probably no other pope 
has done so much as he to realize the papal headship of the 

church and of the world. In ecclesiastical matters 
the^Bishops. ^^ acted with an amazing mastery and assurance. 

Yet in attempting to exercise the ecclesiastical au- 
thority which he claimed, he met with considerable opposition. 
Especially the bishops, few of whom had ever been made to 
feel the power of the bishop of Rome, resented what they con- 
sidered Gregory's usurpation of their powers. He soon per- 
ceived that he must have a set of officials to act as a check on 
Papal ^^^ distant clergy. So, as he said, because he could 

Legates. ''not be everywhere present in person to attend to 

S. B., 66. matters," he sent out his representatives, or legates, 
■ ■' ^' to all parts of the church. Through these legates, 
who acted in his name and by his authority, he was able to 
control the church. He compelled all bishops to take an oath 
of obedience and fidelity to him, and thus built up a universal 
ecclesiastical power, or state, in opposition to the imperial and 
royal governments. 
The political power which Gregory claimed he also attempted 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 203 

in the most energetic manner to exercise. He missed no oppor- 
tunity to enter into relations with the temporal rulers of Europe, 
either openly asserting or covertly implying his 
^'^dThe political authority over them. More than once he 

Governments, declared that "our Lord Jesus Christ has made St. 
s. B., 68-73. Peter ruler over all the kingdoms of this world, and 
has subjected to him principalities, and powers, and 
all the great ones of the world." * He was in part successful in 
this policy, especially with the rulers of the smaller countries, 
but in others he met with determined resistance. The kings 
of England, of France, and of Denmark, and the German em- 
peror stubbornly refused to admit his claims, and resented what 
seemed to them his usurpation of temporal power. Gregory 
showed discretion in refraining from pushing his claims in all 
countries at once. He did not seek to force the issue with 
England and France, but concentrated all his energy on his 
struggle with the emperor. 

With the election of Gregory VII (1073) the spirit of Cluny 
took possession of the papal throne. It manifested itseK im- 
mediately in certain reforms which he proclaimed: (i) The 
Influence of clergy everywhere should cease to marry; (2) 
Cluny. church offices should no longer be bought and sold 

S.B., 60-64. but should be filled in a canonical way; and (3) 
■' ^ ' those who had been canonically elected should be 

invested with their office not by laymen but by the church. 
That is, his reforms included the prohibition of the marriage 
of the clergy, of simony, and of lay investiture. 

In regard to the celibacy of the clergy, it is certain that the 
church early favored it, in the belief that those who were un- 
married, being less involved in the affairs and affections of this 
world, were better able to serve God and to attain a higher 
degree of holiness. The celibate life, being regarded from the 

* In addition to the general statement that Christ had made St. 
Peter the lord of all the kingdoms of this world, Gregory claimed in 
specific terms the proprietorship of southern Italy, Sicily, Dalmatia, 
Germany, Bohemia, Poland, Hungary, Russia, all Spain, Provence, 
Corsica, and Ireland, but veiled somewhat his pretensions to France, 
England, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. 



204 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ascetic point of view as more holy than the married state, even 
for laymen, would of course be more becoming in the clergy. 

Yet, in spite of this wide-spread belief, it is equally 
tS Qeiy^ certain that it was not uncommon for the clergy 

to marry. Even as late as the eleventh century 
not only many of the common clergy but also some of the 
bishops were married. The Cluniac party denounced the 
marriage of the clergy as concubinage, declaring that for the 
clergyman, because of his priestly character, marriage was 

impossible. 

There was also a practical reason why the church at this time 
more than ever before should oppose the marriage of the clergy. 
Feudal ideas held sway everywhere/and there was danger that 
the attempt would be made to provide for the chil- 
Landfand dren of the clergy out of the lands of the church. 
Children of r^ ^g^g q^[^q j^ accordance with feudal ideas and 

Clersy i 

customs that children should have a right to what 
their father held. If this practice should once establish itseK 
in the church, the churches would soon lose their endowments, 
which would be secularized, becoming fixed in the hands of 
laymen. 

Gregory VII shared the views of the Cluniac party and acted 
accordingly. He repeatedly made laws against the marriage 
of the clergy. In some quarters, however, he met with firm 
Stru le I'esistance, for many priests refused to give up 
about^''''^^ ^ their wives, and resented the stigma of illegitimacy 
Celibacy. ^^^^^ Gregory placed on their children. The strug- 
gle was a long one, but after some centuries the papacy suc- 
ceeded in enforcing the law and in making the celibacy of the 
clergy a rule of the church. It is, however, merely a matter 
of discipline, not of dogma, and may at any time be given up. 
Indeed, the Roman CathoUc clergy in certain mission lands, 
such as Greece and Russia, are now permitted to marry. 

Simony* meant originally the outright purchase or sale of 
church offices, but it had come to mean the acquisition of such 

* Simony is derived from Simon, the name of the magician who 
offered money to St. Peter for the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 8 : i8 /.). 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 205 

of&ces in any way except by canonical election. The Cluniac 
party also regarded as simoniacal the investiture with such 
offices by any one except by the clergy. Canonical 
election meant an election in accordance with the 
laws and practices of the church; there was indeed no uniform 
way of conducting elections, but the church was striving to 
make all elections to ecclesiastical offices uniform in method, 
and to put them into the hands of the clergy. For both clergy- 
men and laymen the temptations to practise simony were 
strong. Nearly every church had an endowment, the income 
of which went to the clergy of that church. The richer the 
church, the more desirable were the positions connected with 
it and the greater the number of applicants for them. It was 
the practice of those who had the right to dispose of these offices 
to demand a gift, or a payment of money, from the successful 
applicant. Too often the office was given to the one who offered 
most, and so had the appearance of being sold to the highest 
bidder, regardless of his moral character or his fitness for it. 
From such sales an unscrupulous king might derive a consider- 
able income. To that rude age this practice no doubt seemed 
proper enough, and a reform in it had to wait for the develop- 
ment of an improved moral sense. This improvement came 
with the Cluniac party, which denounced the practice of sell- 
ing offices and demanded a reform in the matter. To these 
reformers, most serious of all was the offense of emperors and 
kings, whose practice it had been to control the elections of 
bishops and abbots and even to invest them with their office. 
In accordance with the general programme of the Cluniac 
party to free the church from all lay control, Gregory VII de- 
manded an unhindered canonical election, prohibited the sale 
of ecclesiastical offices, and forbade laymen to influence the 
elections of clerics or to invest them with their office after 
election. 

In order to explain the points at issue between the pope and 
emperor in regard to simony and investiture, we must first 
understand the relation of the clergy to the state. It is neces- 
sary, therefore, even at the risk of repetition, to recall cer- 



2o6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

tain statements already made, (i) From the first the Romans 
believed that the state had supreme authority over all reli- 
gious matters. In accordance with this view Con- 
Relation ^ J • 1 1 • 11 
between stantme and his successors assumed the same atti- 

State?^ ^"""^ ^"^^ toward Christianity as they had held toward 
the pagan religions. Consequently, they naturally 
regarded the Christian clergy as officials of the state, and, 
whenever occasion arose, used them in administering secular 
affairs. Thus they frequently gave bishops oversight of the 
administration of justice and the election of local officials. 
(2) Moreover, during the invasions of the barbarians, when 
the machinery of the imperial government was destroyed, the 
bishops naturally, because of their office and character, stood 
for law, order, and justice and they were more and more called 
on to perform the functions which had always been exercised 
by the government. (3) Furthermore, the German bishops, be- 
cause of their learning, became the chief advisers of the king 
and were indeed indispensable to him in the management of 
the affairs of his court and government. Everywhere they 
were in the king's council, and all bishops were officials of the 
king, whether regularly taking part in his council or not. This 
council of the king was the germ from which the parliamentary 
body was developed, and so we find bishops having permanent 
seats in the parliamentary bodies of those countries which grew 
out of Germanic kingdoms. The clergy were so essentially a 
part of the state that they came to be called the ''first estate," 
outranking the nobility, or ''second estate," and the commons, 
or "third estate." (4) Finally, the high clergy had also be- 
come bound to the crown in another important way. Bishops 
and abbots had, in the course of centuries, acquired immense 
landed possessions. They were, in fact, among the largest 
landholders, and, like other great landlords, had certain duties 
to perform for the crown. That is, they had become vassals 
of the crown, and sustained the same relations to it as did the 
higher lay nobility. Thus it had come about in a natural way 
that rulers, whether kings or emperors, exercised a commanding 
authority over the clergy. 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 207 

The office of a bishop had, therefore, become complex, (i) 
As bishop he had the administration of all ecclesiastical matters 
in his diocese; he controlled the clergy and was responsible tor 
The Office ^^^ spiritual welfare of all in his bishopric. Be- 
of Bishop sides this spiritual side of his office he had also the 

Twofold. r n 1 1 • 1 

management of ail the temporal mterests and pos- 
sessions of his church — no small task, since the bishops were 
large landholders. And (2) he was an official and vassal of 
the king, holding office and lands from him as a fief. He had, 
in fact, the position of a duke or count, owing the king the same 
military service as they. He administered justice in his diocese 
and frequently possessed other regalia, such as the right to 
coin money and to establish markets. The bishop had, there- 
fore, two sets of functions, the one spiritual, the other secular. 
His authority for exercising the one was in theory derived from 
the church; for exercising the other, from the king. But as a 
matter of fact no clear distinction had been made between 
these, and his investiture by the king was thought to confer 
on him the right to exercise his spiritual as well as his secular 
functions. 

If we turn now to Germany we find that all that has been 
said about the relation of the clergy to the state applies with 
especial force to the German bishops, because they had been 
brought into pecuharly close relations with the 
Relation of emperor. All the German kings, whether crowned 
Emperor.° emperor or not, made constant use of bishops and 
e Tj abbots in the administration of the government 

b. B., Ill, 112. ^ ^ 

and rewarded them with large gifts of land. As the 
government was feudalized, the high clergy, as great landlords, 
were drawn into the feudal relation. That is, they became 
both officials and vassals of the crown. Some of the bishops 
even had the title of duke. A peculiarly strong bond attached 
them to the emperor, who relied on them and used them as a 
countercheck to the turbulent lay nobility. Since the relation 
between the emperor and his high clergy was so intimate, he 
would of course wish to control their election. And in fact we 
find that from Charlemagne to Henry III all the emperors had 



2o8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

exercised the right of naming, appointing, or confirming bishops 
and abbots, and of solemnly investing them with their office. 
The bishop or abbot to be invested first took an oath of homage 
and fidelity to the emperor, and received from him the symbols 
of his office — a ring, a staff (the shepherd's crook, or crozier), 
and a sceptre. 

Such was the situation when Gregory VII published his 
decrees concerning free ecclesiastical elections and investiture. 
A struggle was inevitable, for it was inconceivable that the 

emperor would tamely submit. First of all at 
Inevitable. stake was his imperial supremacy, and the emperor 
j^ jjQ believed that he was emperor by divine right, with 

supreme power over the empire and the church. 
Although the imperial authority over the church had not been 
exactly defined, it was an undoubted fact, for emperors had even 
appointed and deposed popes. With a long line of precedents 
in his favor the emperor was by no means willing to yield his 
authority at the first demand. Besides the question of su- 
premacy he had at stake large interests. As a feudal lord he 
was dependent on the undivided loyalty of his vassals, chief of 
whom were the bishops and abbots. If he could not control 
their election and, investiture, he would be deprived of his rights 
as feudal lord, and be left without authority over many of his 
chief officials and vassals. If he could not command the ser- 
vice which they owed him for their fiefs, his power would be 
materially diminished. The loss of their military service alone 
would have been ruinous to him, for probably half of his availa- 
ble troops were furnished by them. To the emperor it must 
have seemed a struggle for existence. 

When Gregory VII published his prohibition of simony and 

the marriage of the clergy (1074), he met with bitter 

Beginning of . . . ^ ^ . , 1 1 i • 

the Struggle, opposition m Germany. Quite undaunted by this, 
s. B., 74. ^^ proceeded to excommunicate five of the king's 
0., 46. councillors (1075) because they were guilty of si- 

mony. To this the king paid not the slightest atten- 
tion, but retained his excommunicated councillors at court 
and continued to offend the pope by openly selling church 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 209 

offices and appointing and investing bishops. Gregory then 
wrote him a vigorous letter (December, 1075), rebuking him 
for his disobedience and informing him that the decrees 
against simony and the marriage of the clergy would be strictly 
enforced. He further gave the bearers of the letter an oral 
message for Henry to the effect that if he did not mend his 
life and send away his excommunicated councillors, Gregory 
would not only excommunicate but also depose him. The 
letter and message raised a storm of indignation at the German 
court, for never before had so presumptuous a threat been 
heard there. Henry's answer was prompt. At a 
council held at Worms (January 24, 1076) he de- 
posed Gregory and informed him of his deposition in a letter 
remarkable for its plain speech and direct charges. At the, 
same time the German bishops wrote Gregory a letter in which 
they set forth his crimes, and justified their action in deposing 
him. Gregory immediately answered by deposing Henry and 
excommunicating him. In his letter of excommunication, after 
denying aU the charges that had been made against him, he 
proceeds : 

Confident of my integrity and authority, I now declare in the 
name of omnipotent God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that 
Henry, son of the emperor Henry, is deprived of his kingdom of 
Germany and Italy. I do this by thy (St. Peter's) authority and 
in defense of the honor of thy church, because he has rebelled against 
it. He who attempts to destroy the honor of the church should be 
deprived of such honor as he may have held. He has refused to 
obey as a Christian should, he has not returned to God from whom 
he wandered, he has had deahngs with excommunicated persons, 
he has done many iniquities, he has despised the warnings which, 
as thou art witness, I sent to him for his salvation, he has cut him- 
self off from thy church, and has attempted to rend it asunder; 
therefore by thy authority I place him under the curse. It is in 
thy name that I curse him, that all people may know that thou art 
Peter, and upon thy rock the Son of the living God has built his 
church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 

Deposition had been answered by deposition, and the strug- 
gle was on. The situation would have been somewhat less try- 



2IO EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ing for Henry if the Saxons had not renewed their rebellion. 
Using the excommunication as a pretext, they eagerly sup- 
ported the cause of the pope. Moreover, in Ger- 
Answered by many the immediate effect of the excommunica- 
?o^7^^^^^°^' tion was great. All who were in any way dis- 
satisfied with the king — and they were many — 
o., 48. accepted the excommunication with malicious sat- 

■' ■ isfaction and withdrew their allegiance from him. 

Saxons Even Henry's friends deserted him, and when the 

Saxons took the field against him he found himself 
without troops. The rebellious princes determined, if possible, 
to make his deposition permanent. For this purpose they 
called a council to be held at Tribur (October 16, 1076). They 
refused to admit the king to the council, and he was forced to 
remain, for the sake of safety, at the little town of Oppenheim 
on the other side of the Rhine. They wrung the 
Subnnts niost humiliating concessions from him (the Oppen- 

, . heim agreement); he annulled his decrees against 

Oppenheim " . ••.. T . 

Agreement. Gregory, and agreed to submit to him m all things; 
S. B., 78, 79. he recognized the validity of the papal deposition 
and excommunication and promised to present 
himself for trial at a national council, which was to be held in 
the following February and over which Gregory was to come 
to Germany to preside; in the meantime he was to remain in 
Speier, and, laying aside every mark of royalty, live strictly as 
one under the ban of excommunication. 

Henry knew that his enemies, especially the Saxons, wished 
to make his deposition permanent, and were cloaking their 
rebellion with their devotion to the pope. He foresaw that, if 
jj j^ Gregory should come to Germany, take up the 
Escapes to cause of the Saxons, and sit in judgment on him, he 
would hardly be able to clear himself and retain his 
throne. He determined, therefore, by a clever stroke to pre- 
vent the pope from coming to Germany, to deprive his rebellious 
subjects of their pretext, and to destroy the alliance between 
them and Gregory. To this end he resolved to escape into 
Italy and to secure the removal of the ban by humbling himself 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 211 

before the pope. Accordingly he broke his royal word by se- 
cretly leaving Speier and setting out for Italy. Fortune fa- 
vored him, for he safely made the dangerous journey over the 
Alps in the dead of winter. In the meantime Gregory, after 
waiting in vain on the border of Lombardy for the escort which 
the Saxon princes had promised him, had turned back. Not 
trusting the pacific intentions of Henry, Gregory thought it 
more prudent to retire to a place of safety. He 
hastened to take refuge in the strong fortress of 
s. B., 80, 81. Canossa, which is situated on a spur of the chalk 
hills of northern Tuscany, commanding a wide 
view of the Lombard plain. Thither Henry followed him, only 
to find that the pope obdurately refused to receive him. Greg- 
ory demanded that he return to Germany, keep his agreement 
with the princes, and await the papal decision, which was to 
be rendered at the national council in February. For three 
days Henry presented himself in the garb of a penitent at the 
castle-gate before he succeeded in softening the papal resent- 
ment. Finally, at the earnest entreaties of those who were 
about him, Gregory yielded and admitted Henry to his presence. 
The king seemed so penitent and obedient that the pope could 
not hold out; so he removed the ban of excommunication and 
absolved him. The final settlement of the affair, however, was 
postponed to the national council, at which Gregory still ex- 
pected to be present. 

In absolving Henry Gregory had not kept his agreement 

with the Saxons, who were thereby offended. Gregory wrote 

them a letter in which he adroitly excused himself for what he 

had done dnd assured them that, in spite of the 

fact that he had removed the ban, nothing had 

Turns^^^ been settled. Nevertheless, something had been 

settled. The affair at Canossa had the effect of 

turning the tide in favor of Henry. It turned out that the 

pope did not go to Germany, and the national council was not 

held. Since Henry had been freed from the ban, his friends 

came back to him and he began to make war on the Saxons, 

who, although deprived of their pretext, still persisted in their 



212 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

rebellion. They met and, after deposing Henry, elected an 
anti-king, Rudolf of Rheinfelden. Neither king could gain a 
j^^ decisive advantage in battle, and the war dragged 

Anti-King. along for some years. Each appealed to Gregory, 
^, „ , but he refused to decide between them until he 

The Second 

Excommuni- should come to Germany and hold a council. In 

C3.tlOIl 

1080, however, seeing that the possibility of his 
going to Germany was very remote, Gregory again decided 
against Henry, and excommunicated and deposed him, calling 
on St. Peter and St. Paul to "inform all the world that they 
could take kingdoms from the unworthy and give them to 
the worthy" — another way of asserting the papal supremacy. 
The excommunication of 1080 did not seriously affect 
Henry's position. His friends remained true to him and 
supported him more vigorously than ever. In answer to it 
. Henry again deposed Gregory and set up an anti- 

An 

Antipope. pope. In the field, however, fortune never favored 
s B 82 Henry. Time after time he was defeated, and, 

although the anti-king was slain in battle (October, 
1080), the Saxons immediately elected another. The war was 
then carried into Italy. Matilda, the great countess of Tus- 
cany, had become an ardent supporter of the pope, but many 
of her vassals were true to the king. These joined the strong 
imperial party in Lombardy and made war on all who supported 
„ ^y the pope. At the call of his friends in Italy Henry 
in Italy, crossed the Alps (1081-1082), and, after ravaging 

the lands of Matilda, went on to Rome. The 
Romans, however, refused to admit him. Not till 1084 was 
he admitted to the city. There the antipope crowned him 
emperor and held a synod, in which he excommunicated and 
deposed Gregory. Meanwhile Gregory had been besieged in the 
castle Sant' Angelo, anxiously awaiting the coming of his vassal, 
Gr r VII ^^^^^^ Guiscard. Henry retired from the city as 
Dies in the Normans entered it. For having made terms 

with Henry they took vengeance on the Romans 
by burning some quarters of the city. At this the Romans 
were so enraged that Gregory did not dare remain there. 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 213 

When the Normans withdrew to the south Gregory accom- 
panied them. Age and the burdens of his office had broken 
him, and he died soon afterward (1085). 

Henry's success seemed complete. He had been crowned 
emperor and had obtained the support of a large part of Italy; 
he had established his antipope in Rome and driven Gregory 
into exile; and he had thrown the church into such confusion 
that no successor to Gregory could be elected for nearly a year. 
In fact, it was almost three years before a worthy successor of 
Gregory was chosen. This was Urban II (1087-1099), a French- 
man and a monk of Cluny, thoroughly imbued with Gregory's 
ideas, whose programme he adopted and carried out so wisely 
and diplomatically that Henry's success was soon undone. 

When Henry withdrew from Rome (1084), he returned to 
Germany where he spent the next six years in reducing the 
Saxons. He then again went to Italy to recover the lands of 
„ Matilda, which she had already given as a legacy 

to the papacy. There fortune deserted him. He 
'' ■ could not conquer the forces of Matilda; his wife 
Deser^s^ fled to Matilda and made grave charges against 
Henry IV him; some of the Lombard cities joined the pope 

m Italy. / i >i . i • i • ^ ^ 

and made a league against mm; ms son Conrad, 
who had been made king of Italy, rebelled against him and joined 
the pope; and Urban II gradually won about all of Italy to his 
side. In 1097 Henry found it advisable to return to Germany, 
where great disorder .was again prevailing. He was kept 
busy there for a few years restoring order and seemed to have 
succeeded when the pope renewed the old struggle by again 
excommunicating him (1102). Henry tried to outwit the pope 
by taking the cross and making the crusader's vow, which was 
supposed to dissolve the ban of excommunication. The pope, 
however, refused to accept his vow, and many of the princes, 
wanting only an excuse to rebel, again used the papal ban as 
a pretext. Their chief ground of complaint was that Henry 
did not punish his ministerials, who, relying on royal protection, 
committed with impunity many acts of violence. To make 
matters worse for Henry, his son, Henry V, who had been 



214 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

chosen as his successor, out of sheer ambition and in the most 
dastardly manner, rebelled against his father. With consum- 
mate hypocrisy he feigned adherence to the pope, and declared 
that he could have nothing to do with his father until he had 
secured his release from the ban. The Bavarians and Saxons 
joined Henry V, and Germany was again rent by civil war. In 
the midst of it Henry IV died, heart-broken by the shameless 
treatment which he had received at the hands of his son, 
Henry V, who succeeded to the throne. 

That ambition had been the mainspring in the conduct of 
Henry V was shown by his change in policy. Once established 
in power, he adopted his father's position and continued the 

struggle against the papacy with the same un- 
FoUowsHis scrupulousness that had characterized his conduct 
Policy. toward his father. In mo he went to Italy and 

g g g forced the issue with such vigor that the pope, 

R., ii6. Paschal II, made a complete surrender. In mi 

Paschal, in order to retain the right to invest bish- 
ops, agreed that all the bishops of the empire should surrender 
their lands and secular office to the emperor, and should live 
on the tithes and free-will offerings of their congregations. 
This, of course, would have ended the whole difficulty. Un- 
fortunately, Paschal had reckoned without the bishops who 
were concerned. They refused to give up their. great wealth 
and their influential position in the state, and brought such a 
storm down on the head of Paschal that he cancelled his agree- 
ment with Henry. The king, however, was not to be put off, 
and Paschal, yielding to force, surrendered to him the full 
right to invest bishops and abbots with all their lands, office, 
and power, both spiritual and temporal. Thereupon Paschal 
crowned him and solemnly promised never to put him under 
the ban. 

Henry's victory, however, was of short duration. The clergy 
refused to abide by the pope's action, and Paschal was forced 
to annul this agreement also. Consequently the struggle was 
begun anew. For eleven years it was waged with as much 
bitterness as ever. Force, however, was of no avail against 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 215 

the unyielding sentiment of the church, and Henry's victories 
brought him no enduring advantages. The pope again put 

him under the ban and obdurately refused to treat 
of°Worms! ^ith him. At length Henry was convinced of the 
1 122. futility of his efforts, and at the same time the new 

s. B., 85-86. pope, CaHxtus H (1119-1124), was a little less in- 
R.* ^17. flexible than his predecessors had been. Accordingly 

they were able to reach an agreement in the con- 
cordat of Worms (11 2 2). The victory was with the church, for 
Henry made perpetual and fundamental concessions to it, while 
the concessions which he received were made to him person- 
ally and were not extended to his successors. He granted 
''to God, his holy apostles Peter and Paul, and to the whole 
catholic church . . . canonical election, free consecration, and 
the investiture with the ring and the staff (crozier)." In re- 
turn for this perpetual grant, Calixtus made certain temporary 
concessions to Henry: in Germany bishops and abbots should 
be elected in Henry's presence, and, before they were conse- 
crated, he should invest them with their regalia by means of 
the sceptre; in case of disputed elections Henry should, in 
accordance with the advice and judgment of the archbishop 
and bishops concerned, give his assent and support to the 
"wiser" party; outside of Germany investiture should take 
place within six months after consecration; and all should 
render Henry the services due him from their, fiefs. 

Under existing conditions this compromise was sensible, 
and, inasmuch as it protected the interests of both sides, it 
was as fair as any compromise was likely to be. Unfortu- 
A Lull in nately, it was not a perpetual agreement. The 
the Struggle, concessions which Henry made to the church were 
Cf. s. B., 94. for all time, but those which Calixtus made to him 

S B 87 

■ were secured to him alone, and not to his succes- 

sors. By the concordat the papacy secured forever the prin- 
ciple of free elections and the right to invest with the ring and 
the staff. As the concordat was granted to Henry alone, his 
death (11 25) annulled it. His successor did not ask to have it 
renewed, and in the disputes which later arose about elections 



2i6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

neither side appealed to it. Later emperors, it should be added, 
refused to be bound by Henry's concessions to the church. 
In fact, Frederick Barbarossa and his successors exercised al- 
most as much influence over the election of bishops as did the 
emperors in the days before the struggle over investiture began. 
So the concordat, contrary to the commonly accepted view, 
contributed very little to the solution of the question at issue 
between empire and papacy. Nevertheless, for the next thirty 
years a kind of truce was observed, and, although there were a 
few quarrels about the elections of bishops and abbots, neither 
party resorted to violence. The reason of this was found in 
the character of the men who were chosen emperor and in the 
difficulties which beset the popes. 

In the imperial election which followed the death of Henry V 
the extreme papal party scored a success. At the time the leader 
of that party was the archbishop of Mainz. In summoning 
the princes to a diet to elect a king he asked them 
^j2 5-1137', ^^ "bear in mind the oppression of the church in 
Yields to these days and to pray earnestly that in the provi- 
dence of God this election may result in the freeing 
s! B.] 90, gi. of the church from its yoke of servitude." Evi- 
dently this party regarded the limited control which 
the concordat gave to Henry V as "oppression" and as a "yoke 
of servitude." The diet was a stormy one, and it was a long 
time uncertain which party should win. In the end, however, 
the papal party, largely through the cleverness of the arch- 
bishop of Mainz, vrho presided over the meetings, elected its 
candidate, Lothar III (11 25-1 13 7). Although possessing con- 
siderable ability and conscious of the justice of the imperial 
claims, Lothar was nevertheless so subservient to the papacy 
that in all the most important matters he yielded to it. Pliant 
and timid, he never dared resort to extreme measures to defend 
the rights of the crown. Twice he ventured to ask the pope 
to restore to him the right of investiture as his predecessors 
had exercised it, but each time he was easily rebuffed. In 
regard to the lands of Matilda, he surrendered the imperial 
claim to them on the condition that the pope invest him with 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 217 

them. He thus became the pope's vassal for them. He made 
a vigorous campaign against the Normans in southern Italy, 
but, as it was unsuccessful, he did not succeed in advancing the 
imperial claims. 

Quite as subservient to the pope was Lothar's successor, 
Conrad III (1138-1152). Although a member of the great 
Hohenstaufen family, he was a man of no ability and had 
So also' neither the time nor the inclination to renew the 

Conrad III, struggle. Nor can he be said to have governed 
Germany well. That unfortunate country was 
■' ^^ ^^' distracted with feuds, which he was powerless to 
quell. Neglecting his duty to Germany, he spent some years 
on an ill-fated crusade. He wished to make war on the Nor- 
mans in southern Italy, but his plans miscarried. 

Nor was the papacy in a better position than the empire, 

since it was rent asunder by a disputed papal election. In 

1 130 the college of cardinals was divided into two parties, 

each of which uncompromisingly supported its 

Papal candidate. At that time the law governing papal 

1130/*^^' elections was defective, providing merely that the 

c, -D 00 candidate who received the votes of the ''wiser 
b a., 00. 

party" should be pope, without telling how to de- 
termine which was the "wiser" party. The simple expedient of 
requiring the successful candidate to receive a majority of the 
votes was not practised. Indeed, every one who received votes, 
no matter how few, might claim to be the true pope, on the 
ground that the party which supported him was the "wiser" 
one. Consequently disputed papal elections had to be settled 
by force. One of the candidates, Anaclete II (1130-1138), 
was supported by the Romans and the people of southern 
Italy. He bought the recognition of Roger, the Norman duke, 
by conferring on him the title of king and raising his duchy to 
Innocent II ^^^ TSLYik of a kingdom. The other. Innocent II 
ii3o-ii43» (1130-1143), fled to France, where he won the sup- 

Wins. 

port of Bernard of Clairvaux, and through him that 
of the kings of France and of Germany. It was chiefly through 
the efforts of Lothar III that Innocent overcame his rival, al- 



2i8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

though the contest lasted for nearly ten years. Innocent 
finally brought Roger to his side by recognizing him as king 
of Sicily, thereby offending Conrad III, who regarded Sicily 
as a part of the empire and Roger as a usurper. Roger and his 
successors, however, were turbulent and aggressive subjects, 
who did not hesitate to make war on their feudal lord, even 
though he were the pope. The peace which Innocent made 
with Roger was of short duration, and during the next twenty- 
five years the kings of Sicily were generally in rebellion, and 
more than once invaded the papal lands in the effort to seize 
them and to add them to their kingdom. Against these Nor- 
mans the pope could look only to the German emperor for 
help. 

Scarcely had the troubles of the disputed papal election been 
settled when the papacy was beset by another danger, this time 
in Rome itself. The great communal movement, of which the 
The Romans ^P^^ode in Rome was a part, will be described in a 
Rebel against later chapter. For the present purpose it will suf- 

PapalRule. ^ ^, -i,, ... 

lice to say that m the tenth century the cities m 
Europe were governed in an autocratic way by lords; that in 
cities in which there was a bishop he was generally the lord, 
in others the lord was a layman; and that in the eleventh 
century the inhabitants of the cities began to rebel against their 
lords, and after driving them out they set up governments of 
their own. The communal movement was therefore to a cer- 
tain extent an experiment in democracy. As in other cities, 
so also in Rome, its bishop had become its lord, governing it 
in an autocratic way. The movement in Rome differed from 
that in other cities, chiefly in the fact that there the chimerical 
attempt was made to restore Rome to her ancient position 
as mistress of the world, and to that end many of the ancient 
offices were restored in name. 
B . As through the political chaos in the west there 

Rome agam & f 

to Rule the still lived on the idea of the universal empire, so at 
Rome the memory of her greatness was still fresh, 
and the people had some idea of the power they had exer- 
cised in the time of the republic. Restive under all control, 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 219 

they had frequently rebelled against the growing absolutism 
of the pope. In 1143 they made a determined effort to put an 
end to papal domination. They drove the pope out of the 
city, removed all his officials from office, re-created the senate, 
and intrusted the government of the city to it. Two years 
Arnold f l^-ter (1145) Arnold of Brescia came and soon ob- 
Brescia and tained a dominating influence in the city. Born 
and reared in northern Italy, the home of the com- 
munal movement, he was thoroughly imbued with its spirit, 
and supported it with all his might. It was to him, however, 
merely a corollary of a more important principle. In the 
struggle about investitures he had come to the radical belief 
that the clergy should have nothing whatever to do in secular 
matters, but should devote themselves entirely to the reli- 
gious duties of their office. Consequently, he held that bishops 
should resign their lands and their secular office to the emperor, 
thus ending forever the question about investitures. Further- 
more, he was possessed with the idea of the sinfulness of prop- 
erty, an idea that had cropped out in the church at various 
times, and which was soon to become a central reforming prin- 
ciple of St. Francis. It is not quite clear how far he wished to 
apply this principle, but it is certain that he wished the clergy 
to live by it. He is credited with saying that "clergymen with 
property, bishops with regalia, and monks with possessions 
could not be saved." He himself exemplified his principles by 
a life of poverty and austere morality. Still another idea took 
possession of him after he came to Rome; fired by the memory 
of the city's greatness, he sought to make it again the head 
of the world. To accomplish this he attempted a complete 
restoration of its ancient government as well as of its ancient 
organization of society; he proposed to reform the senate and 
to invest it with all its ancient authority, to reorganize the 
knightly, or equestrian, order (the equites) , and to fix the author- 
ity of the people (the plebs), to rebuild the capitol, and to re- 
store the ancient offices exactly. The people of Rome, thus 
reorganized, were again to rule the world; even the emperor, 
who was- to be chosen by them, was to be their official, and the 



220 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

pope was to have no authority, except in ecclesiastical and 
religious matters. 

A moment's consideration will show that all such restora- 
tions are impossible. Nevertheless, the commune of Rome, 
although not at all the ancient Rome which it pretended to be, 
p f th ^^^ ^^ important factor in the politics of the next 
Commune years. Popes condemned it and fought it, but 

of Rome. „ , . . , , 

were compelled to recognize it and to make peace 
with it. For months at a time it kept the pope out of the 
city. It confiscated his property, withheld his revenues, seized 
his strongholds, and made war on him. Eugene III (1145- 
1153), despairing of overcoming it, finally appealed to Conrad 
III and begged him to come and punish the rebellious city. 
Conrad, however, was engrossed with the difficulties which 
beset him in his realm, and was therefore unable to give the 
pope the desired aid. 

Still another danger threatened the papacy. The Greek 
emperor, remembering that all the west had once been a part 
of his empire, and wishing for commercial reasons to possess 
The Greeks ^ome Italian ports, made vigorous efforts for some 

Threaten years to get a foothold in Italy. He troubled the 
Italy. . . , , . 1 1 , 1 1 • 

coast with his navy and landed his troops m vari- 
ous places. By force, bribery, and intrigue he seemed likely 
to accomplish his desire. This, of course, the pope opposed 
with all his might. So for many years the popes, in need of 
the emperor's help to restore them to their place in Rome, to 
protect them against the Norman king of Sicily, and to pre- 
vent the Greeks from reconquering a part of Italy, were more 
tractable, and settled their differences with the emperors with- 
out resorting to extreme measures. Nevertheless, during the 
last years of this period the papal pretensions to supremacy 
tended to become more firmly established, and to present them- 
selves with greater assurance. The growing bold- 
oUhe^Pope! ^^^^s of the papal claim was well illustrated by 
Innocent II, who, probably because Lothar III 
had become his vassal for the lands of Matilda, caused the wall 
of his palace to be decorated with a picture representing 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1073-1152 221 

Lothar kneeling at the pope's feet, doing him homage, and 
receiving from him the imperial crown. The picture meant 
to say that the empire was a papal fief, as is evident from the 
following inscription, with which it was provided: 

"Rex venit ante fores jurans prius urbis honores, . ' 

Post homo fit papae recepit quo dante coronam." 

That is, "The king comes before the gates of the city, first 
swearing to observe its rights; then he becomes the pope's 
vassal and receives from him the crown." 

In the seventy-five years of struggle the pope had won cer- 
tain solid advantages: he had a charter from the emperor, 
granting the free canonical election of bishops and abbots, and 
the right to invest them with the ring and the staff; 
he had got possession of the disputed lands of Ma- 
tilda; by conferring on the duke the title of king he had as- 
sumed the feudal proprietorship of Sicily and southern Italy; 
and he had in a pictorial way asserted that the empire was a 
papal fief. The emperor, on the other hand, had gained noth- 
ing. Both Lothar and Conrad had served the papacy rather 
than the empire, admitting in many ways the supremacy of 
the pope. Consequently, under them the imperial pretensions 
to supremacy faded out and lost the aggressiveness which had 
characterized them under Henry IV. If we compare the posi- 
tion of the empire and papacy in 1075 with their position in 
1 1 52, there can be no doubt that the first period of the struggle 
had turned decidedly to the advantage of the papacy. 



CHAPTER XII 

THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN PAPACY AND EMPIRE. 
THE SECOND PERIOD (1152-1198) 

LoTHAR III and Conrad III had, as we have seen, . subordi- 
nated the empire to the papacy. It was inevitable, however, 
that the struggle should be renewed as soon as there should 
come to the imperial throne an able and determined 

Frederick c i. -n j • i -n i, / 

Barbarossa, man. buch a One was I'reaeriCK Barbarossa (1152- 
R news^°' ^^9°)?* ^^^ Consequently he spent the best years of 
Ancient his long reign in a persistent effort to recover what 

Claims. his predecessors had surrendered. Thoroughly im- 

S B 05 06 Pi"£ssed with the dignity of the imperial office, he 
was filled with the ambition to restore the empire 
to its former greatness. Regarding himself as the successor 
and heir of the great emperors, he determined to rule in the 
same grand way as he imagined they had governed. At the 
time of his election Frederick announced to the pope that he 
was going to restore the empire to its former strength, and at 
the same time to honor and obey the clergy. Evidently he 
did not then perceive the irreconcilable conflict between the 
papal and imperial claims. His ideas, though large, were in- 
definite until he came into contact with professors of law in the 
university of Bologna, who expounded to him the imperial 
theory as they found it expressed in the code of Justinian. 
Thereafter his programme or policy was definitely and plainly 
formulated, and it brought him into conflict with the papacy 
and also with the Italian cities. 

Basing his right to the German crown on the action of the 

* From their ancestral castle in southern Germany (a few miles east 
of Stuttgart) he and his family are called the Hohenstaufen, or the 
Staufer; cj. genealogical tables. 

222 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 223 

princes, Frederick merely informed the pope of his election 
without asking him to confirm it. With a vigor unknown to 
Vigorous ^^^^ generation he set himself to the task of end- 
Rule in ing the feuds which were ruining Germany. The 

country was in a wretched state because the people 
■' ^^^7' ^4 • -^ould not resort to courts for justice against those 
who wronged them, but, taking the law into their ow^n hands, 
made war on all their enemies. Consequently, petty and 
ruinous private warfare was raging from one end of Germany 
to the other. During Frederick's whole reign one of his chief 
interests was the maintenance of order. He more than once 
issued stringent laws, and threatened with severe punishment 
all who should disturb the peace. Passing through one province 
after another, he also compelled the people to take an oath 
that they would commit no act of violence.* 
' At first Frederick thought only of working harmoniously 
with the pope. To govern the world w^as a task which had 
been committed jointly to the church and to the empire, and 
he informed the pope that he intended to do his whole duty as 
the character of his office demanded. Pope Eugene III was, 
as we have seen, in grave need of help. The Romans were 
in rebellion against him; his vassal, the king of Sicily, was at 
war with him ; and the Greek emperor was trying to get posses- 
sion of a part of the Italian mainland. Since Frederick's first 
ambition was to acquire the imperial crown, and since he could 
obt^-in this only from the pope, it was natural that he should 
Treaty of cspouse the papal cause. Accordingly, in 1153, 
Constance, Frederick and the pope concluded a treaty, in which 

the papal diplomatic skiU took advantage of Fred- 

■' ^^' crick's eagerness to possess the imperial crown. 

Frederick promised in specific terms that without the consent 

of the pope he would not make peace with the Romans or with 

the king of Sicily, but that he would use all his power to re- 

* Furthermore, he sought to diminish such warfare by reviving an 
ancient punishment which was extremely humiliating: he sentenced 
every noble who disturbed the peace to carry a dog in his arms a Ger- 
man mile (probably three or four English miles). 



224 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

duce the Romans to papal subjection, and to defend the pope 
and his possessions against all who attacked them (meaning 
the king of Sicily). He further promised to do all he could to 
keep the Greek emperor from obtaining land in Italy. On the 
other hand, the pope promised merely to give him the imperial 
crown, and to aid him in "maintaining and increasing the 
honor of his realm," a phrase about the interpretation of which 
there could easily be a wide difference of opinion. 

Frederick hastened the work of establishing peace in Ger- 
many in order to go as soon as possible to Rome to receive the 
imperial crown. This, however, was not the only reason of 

his haste. The smaller Lombard cities, oppressed 
in^italy^ ^Y their more powerful neighbors, besought his 

aid, and the commune of Rome, still resisting the 
pope, appealed to him and wished to make terms with him. 
In the autumn of 1154, he crossed the Alps, and after spending 
some months in a fruitless attempt to settle the quarrels of 
the Italian cities, he proceeded to Rome. Just then the pope 
was Adrian IV, the only Englishman who has ever occupied the 
throne of St. Peter. As his situation had not changed, he re- 
newed the treaty of Constance and looked to Frederick for 
help against all his enemies. When Frederick approached 
the city Adrian joined him. Their first meeting was marred 
by a dispute over a matter of etiquette, which did not augur well 
for their harmonious relations in the future. When the pope 

arrived at the king's camp, Frederick neither went 
Episode. out to meet him, nor led his horse, nor held his 
s B 08 stirrup for him to dismount. Adrian was deeply 

offended at this lack of respect, and refused to 
enter into friendly relations with him and ''to give him the kiss 
of peace." Frederick declared that it was beneath his dignity 
to render the pope such a service, and that it was not his duty 
to do so because none of his predecessors had ever done such a 
thing. For two days they argued the question with great bitter- 
ness. Finally Frederick was convinced by some of the older 
princes in his following that Lothar III had rendered the pope 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 225 

this service; consequently he submitted and did so too.* 

They then proceeded to Rome, where Adrian crowned him 

emperor. This offended the people of Rome, who, 

Coronation. \ V i i • 

having restored, as they thought, the ancient 
republic of Rome, claimed the right to name and crown the 
emperor. Scarcely had the coronation ceremony been per- 
formed when the Romans attacked Frederick's troops in the 
streets. A bloody battle ensued, in which Frederick repulsed 
them, but for the sake of safety he withdrew from the city, 
taking Adrian IV with him. He still intended to make a cam- 
paign against the king of Sicily, but his vassals, fearing the great 
heat and the Italian fever, insisted on returning to Germany 
at once. He accordingly set out for the north without having 
in any way fulfilled the terms of the treaty of Constance. In 
fact he had rendered the situation of Adrian worse, for, because 
of his coronation and the battle in the streets, the Romans 
were more embittered against him than ever, and for some 
months refused to permit him to enter the city. 

The pope, thwarted by the emperor's failure to keep his 
promise, was thrown on his own resources. In regard to the 
policy to be pursued the college of cardinals was divided. A 
rpj^g large majority of them still contended that all hope 

Cardinals was to be placed on the emperor, and that the 

pope should remain true to him and wait until he 
could return to Italy with an army sufficient to reduce all the 
enemies of the church. A small minority, however, was hostile 
to the emperor and urged Adrian to act independently of him 

and to make peace with William, who in the mean- 

Adnan IV . i i i • r i -r^ 

Makes Peace tune had succeeded his father Roger as king 01 
and Normans. Sicily. After some months of deliberation Adrian 
g g decided to act on the advice of the minority. He 

accordingly came to an understanding with the 
people of Rome, and also concluded a favorable treaty with the 
king of Sicily without asking Frederick's consent. In making 

* In fact several German kings had done so; among them were 
Pippin, Ludwig the Pious, and Ludwig II, 



226 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

this treaty Adrian assumed that he was feudal lord of Sicily, 
thus offending Frederick, who regarded Sicily as a part of the 
empire and William as a usurper. Furthermore, Frederick be- 
lieved that Adrian was bound by the treaty of Constance not 
to make peace with the king of Sicily without his consent. 

Frederick's anger soon found expression. A Danish bishop, 
while passing through the empire on his return from Rome, 
was seized by some barons and held as a prisoner. In spite of 
the pope's urgent appeals, Frederick made no at- 
Besangon tempt to have him released. Adrian finally wrote 
jj^^7° ^' a sharp letter of remonstrance, which his legates 

_. _, delivered to Frederick at Besancon (ii«57). When 

S. B., I00-I02. , . . 

this letter was translated into German in the pres- 
ence of Frederick and his court, it produced the deepest indigna- 
tion. For Adrian, after reminding Frederick that he had con- 
ferred the imperial crown on him, added that he did not regret 
this, but would gladly, if it were possible, confer on him even 
greater beneficia — which might mean either fiefs or kindnesses. 
The translator of the letter rendered it "fiefs," thus making it 
appear that the pope boldly claimed the empire as a papal fief. 
An angry discussion followed, during which some of the hot- 
headed nobles became so enraged that they drew their swords, 
rushed on the legates, and would have slain them but for the 
intervention of the emperor. Frederick seized all the papers 
of the legates, among which he found many copies of the pope's 
letter addressed to the bishops and abbots of Germany, and a 
large number of blank forms bearing the pope's seal and signa- 
ture. These blanks, when filled out by the ambassadors, had 
the force of papal commands and were to be used for the pur- 
pose of levying assessments on the churches of Germany when- 
ever and wherever the legates should see fit. At this Frederick's 
anger was deeply stirred. This feature of the episode is im- 
portant, because it is one of the earliest evidences we possess 
that the papal taxation was becoming burdensome and creat- 
ing dissatisfaction with the church. Frederick ordered the 
legates to return to Rome immediately on the same road by 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 227 

which they had come, turning neither to the right nor to the 
left. A spirited correspondence ensued, in which Adrian finally 
explained the objectionable phrases: by ''conferring" the im- 
perial crown he meant merely that he had placed it on Freder- 
ick's head, and by '^beneficia^' he had meant kindnesses. 

Thus the incident was closed, but, as Adrian had not frankly 
declared that the empire was not a papal fief, nothing had been 
done to define the relation between empire and papacy. The 
deeper question at issue had therefore not been 
Renewed^'^^ Settled, and the quarrel was soon renewed. Many 
o Ti acts of the one offended the other, because each was 

a. Jd., 104. ' 

acting in the belief that his authority was superior 
to that of the other. Adrian finally sent ambassadors to Fred- 
erick to state the papal demands : the emperor should not send 
his oflScials to Rome without the pope's consent, because the 
pope possessed independent sovereignty in the city; the em- 
peror should not collect the fodrum (a tax in provisions for 
the support of himself and his army when passing through the 
territory) from papal lands except when he came to Rome for 
the imperial crown; bishops in Italy should take only the oath 
of fidelity to the emperor and not the oath of homage; this they 
should render only to the pope; the bishops should not be re- 
quired to entertain (free of charge) the imperial ambassadors; 
and, finally, certain lands which were then in the emperor's 
hands should be restored to the pope because they belonged to 
him.* In reply to these demands Frederick presented a long 
list of his grievances against the pope, only a few of which 
are known: Adrian had broken the treaty of Constance, in 
which he had promised not to make peace with the Greeks, 
the Sicilians, or the Romans, without Frederick's consent; 
papal ambassadors came and went through Germany without 
the king's permission, and, while doing so, lived at the ex- 
pense of the bishops; and the pope intrenched on the royal 

* These were Tivoli, Ferrara, Massa, Fiscaglia, all the lands of the 
Countess Matilda, all the territory from Aquapendente to Rome, the 
duchy of Spoleto, and the islands of Sardinia and Corsica. 



228 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and imperial prerogatives by hearing appeals from Frederick's 
subjects. Frederick declared that he was willing to submit 
each point to investigation and trial, but the pope, regarding 
his own demands as an ultimatum, stubbornly refused to dis- 
cuss them. He was about to put Frederick under the ban 
when he was suddenly cut off by death (1159). 

This quarrel between pope and emperor led to a contested 
papal election. The anti-German party in the college of car- 
dinals had grown, and by this time numbered among its ad- 
herents nearly all the cardinals. This party elected 
Papaf ^^ P^P^ Alexander III (11 59-1 181), a man who was 

Election, known to be a determined opponent of Frederick. 
1159. . ^ "^ , . 

A small group of cardinals, believing that the em- 

107, 113°^ peror was in the right, and appealing to him for aid 
and protection, elected as antipope a man who was 
an ardent supporter of the imperial cause. Frederick supported 
this antipope and entered into a conflict with Alexander III 
which was to last for seventeen years. Frederick would proba- 
bly have had little difficulty in overcoming the pope if he had 
not at the same time had other foes to contend with. These 
were his unruly German vassals and the cities of northern Italy. 

We have already seen that the cities of Italy had rebelled 
against their lords, driven them out, and set up a government 
of their own, which we call communal. Although these cities 
still regarded themselves as a part of the empire and subject 
to the emperor, they each formed, in fact, a little city-state, 
exercising complete sovereignty within its walls and over the 
territory about it. They had been able to develop this sover- 
eignty because the emperor's journeys into Italy had been rel- 
atively infrequent and of short duration. It was inevitable 
that there would be trouble if Frederick should attempt to re- 
cover sovereignty over them, and it was equally inevitable that 
he would make the attempt. 

When Frederick went to Italy for the second time (11 58), 
he held a diet on the Roncaglian plain (in the valley of the Po), 
to which he summoned representatives of all the cities and cer- 
tain professors of the law school of Bologna. In a meeting of 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 229 

the diet Frederick set forth his claims to the rights of the 
crown (regalia) and, in order that there might be no misun- 
^, derstanding in the matter, asked for a definition of 

The 

Emperor's them. Thereupon the diet unanimously decided 
Defined. ^^^^ the emperor had the feudal sovereignty over 

g g the cities, and his regalia were defined as the right 

" to appoint dukes, marquises, counts, consuls (that 
is, the officials in the cities), to coin money, to levy toUs, to 
collect the fodrum, to collect customs and harbor dues, to fur- 
nish safe-conducts, to control mills, fisheries, bridges, and all 
the waterways, and to demand an annual tax not only from 
the land but also from each person." 

After this clear decision had been reached it seemed that 
Frederick was on the point of realizing his high dream of re- 
storing imperial sovereignty in Italy. He sent his officials 

through all the towns and even through Sardinia 
Rebel.^ ^^^ 2,nd Corsica to assume the authority which had been 

unanimously accorded him. Everywhere, howfever, 
difficulties beset them. The people, accustomed to elect their 
officials, were enraged that the ambassadors insisted on ap- 
pointing them. Worse even than this was the imperial com- 
mand to destroy the walls and towers with which every city had 
surrounded itself. Popular indignation increased daily against 
the men who had represented the cities in the diet as well as 
against the emperor. Everywhere rebellions broke out. Some 
of the imperial officials were maltreated, and others escaped the 
violence of the mob only by fleeing in the night. Frederick 
prepared to put down the rebellions and to chastise the of- 
fenders. Crema and Milan were the first to feel his anger. 
He took the little city of Crema after a desperate resistance of 
eight months, and Milan after a heroic defense of nearly three 
years. Both cities he completely destroyed and drove their 
inhabitants into exile. In these efforts, however, his forces 
were exhausted, and he was unable to continue the war. He 
was compelled to return to Germany, and, as he withdrew, the 
cities were left to restore their communal governments and to 
resume their course, which had been interrupted by his coming. 



230 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Three times after this Frederick returned to Italy to renew 
the struggle (1163, 1167, and 1174), but with ever-diminishing 
success. The opposition to him grew stronger, until the whole 
rj,^^ country was united to resist him. The pope, 

Lombard Alexander III, with great ability and untiring efforts, 
established against him the Lombard League, which 
included the king of Sicily, the papal states, and the Italian 
cities. Frederick's successes were temporary, and the few 
advantages which he won he could not retain, while the league 
constantly increased in power. At the critical moment some 
of Frederick's chief German vassals refused to come to his 
support. The end of the struggle was reached 
in the battle of Legnano (1176), in which Freder- 
Fr^ederick. ^^^ ^^^^ Utterly defeated and his army destroyed. 
He was compelled to conclude a six years' truce, at 
Constance, the end of which, by the peace of Constance (1183), 
^^ ^' the relations between the emperor and the Lombard 

s. B.,^io8, 109. cities were defined and peace fully restored. Fred- 
erick surrendered his claims as they had been 
defined in the Roncaglian diet (11 58), and granted the cities 
free self-government with the right to elect their own officials, 
and all the regalia and other rights which they had been accus- 
tomed to exercise. For Frederick very little was left: if there 
were any regalian rights which the cities had not exercised, he 
should have them; the consuls (chief officials) of each city 
should, before taking office, give him an oath of allegiance and 
swear to protect all his possessions and rights, and Frederick 
should invest them with their office; every time he came to 
Italy the cities should repair the roads and bridges, pay the 
fodrum, and furnish him and his troops with a market (that is, 
bring provisions to them to sell) ; the cities recognized Frederick 
as the highest judicial instance by according him the right to 
hear appeals and to establish his appellate judges in each city. 

What Frederick had failed to acquire by force he set himself 
to get by peaceful and diplomatic means. Toward the cities 
he pursued a policy of conciliation which won him the love of 
the citizens, and during the last years of his reign nothing arose 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 231 

to disturb the peace established in 11 83. With Alexander III 
Frederick made peace, but not all the points at issue between 
them were settled, and consequently their rela- 
Diplomacy. tions could not be entirely harmonious. In fact, 
Frederick continued to assert the imperial claims 
almost as if he had been victorious at Legnano. Having 
failed to wrest Sicily from the pope and from the Norman, he 
determined to secure it in a peaceable way. He married his 
son, Henry VI, to Constance, the heiress of the Sicilian crown. 
The pope, who foresaw the danger which this marriage threat- 
ened, opposed it, but in vain. The relations between Frederick 
and the pope grew constantly more strained. The grounds 
of offense were various: the quarrel about the lands 
Offense.^ ° of Matilda was renewed; the pope complained be- 
cause in Germany tithes were sometimes paid to 
laymen instead of to the clergy; bishops and abbots were com- 
pelled to have laymen to represent them in secular affairs, and 
these advocates, as such representatives were called, had ac- 
quired so powerful a position that they often oppressed those 
whom their office bound them to protect; this evil, the pope 
said, Frederick did nothing to correct; at the death of a bishop 
Frederick was accustomed to seize all his possessions (s polio), 
and also to appropriate all the income of a bishopric as long as 
it was vacant. To these practices the pope vigorously objected; 
and some disputed episcopal elections, in which the pope favored 
one candidate and Frederick another, added to the bitterness 
between them. 

More than once a complete rupture seemed unavoidable. 
The papal policy, however, was frequently interrupted by 
death; there were four papal elections within the space of six 
Death of years. And, at an opportune moment, the news 
Frederick, that Saladin had taken Jerusalem came and filled 
all Europe with a new and overpowering interest. 
Jerusalem must be recovered at any cost. The death of the 
pope occurred a few days later, and the cardinals, determined 
that peace should be restored between papacy and empire, 
unanimously elected as pope a man who was known to be a 



232 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

warm friend of Frederick. The new pope was willing to con- 
cede to the emperor everything that rightfully belonged to him 
if only he would take the cross. This Frederick did, and so 
peace was made on terms favorable to him. He was not 
permitted, however, to enjoy the fruits of this peace, for on 
the way to Jerusalem he met his death by drowning (1190). 

One of Frederick's dearest ambitions had been to secure his 

family in the possession of both the German and the imperial 

crowns. In 1169 he had persuaded the German princes to 

elect as king his son Henry VI, then only four years 

?i9o-ii?7. ^^^' ^^^^ t^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^i^^ ^^ procure the im- 
perial crown for Henry, but this the pope steadily 
refused, declaring that from the nature of things there could 
be but one emperor. Henry VI had been intrusted with the 
government of Germany when his father set out on the crusade, 
and consequently when the news of Frederick's death reached 
Germany there was no break in the government. Shortly be- 
fore this William II, the last of the Norman kings of Sicily, 
had died (1189), and Henry made all possible haste to go and 
take possession of that kingdom. On his way he stopped at 
Rome and was crowned emperor by the pope. Sicily, however, 
was not to be his without a struggle. A large party in that 
country, opposed to having a foreigner for their king, disre- 
garded the claim of Constance to the throne, and elected as 
king one of their own number, Tancred, count of Lecce. The 
pope had already recognized Tancred, and was supporting him 
with his influence. Henry, however, was not to be turned 
back by this, and, although he knew that he would thereby in- 
cur the anger of the pope, he proceeded against Tancred. His 
first campaign ended disastrously, and he was compelled to 
return to Germany, where he was for some time engaged in 
overcoming rebellions and in settling feuds. At no time did 
his ability as a statesman manifest itself more clearly than in 
these first years of his reign. He had been brought up in the 
imperial idea, and it is not strange that his ambition should 
have outstripped that of his father. Henry VI already en- 
tertained the hope and the well-defined plan of re-establishing 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 233 

the empire in its widest extent. To accomplish this he must 
have peace at home. Consequently he exerted himself to the 
E blish s utmost to establish peaceful relations among all his 
Peace in subjects. By nature he possessed a conciliatory 

and winning manner, and this had been developed 
by the training in diplomacy which he had received. Every- 
where he showed that he was a successful peacemaker. He not 
only ended the feuds but also united those who had been en- 
gaged in them in an enthusiastic devotion to himself. 

Fortune for a while favored Henry VI in the realization of his 
imperial plans. Richard Lionheart, king of England, had been 
the centre of a league against him, allying himself with some of 

the rebellious nobles of Germany and with Tancred 
Richard of of Sicily. Richard, while returning from his cru- 
Vafsaf^ ^^^ sade, attempted to pass through Germany, but was 

seized and delivered into Henry's hands. Richard 
could free himself only by paying a ransom, by agreeing to 
break his alliance with all who were Henry's enemies, to furnish 
Henry with troops for his campaign against Tancred, and, most 
important of all in Henry's eyes, by acknowledging that Eng- 
land was an imperial fief, doing homage to Henry, and receiving 
the crown of England from his hands (1194). In this way 
Henry accomplished the first great step toward the realization 
of his imperial dream.* 

On France Henry watchfully gazed, but in vain, for no op- 
portunity to make the king of France his vassal presented it- 
self. Sicily was still in rebellion; so in 11 94 he recrossed the 
Establishes Alps. The Italian cities were once more involved 
Imperial fn Strife and were divided into two hostile parties. 

Government 

in Italy and Henry cleverly conciliated them all and soon had 

^^^^' them at peace with one another and devoted to 

himself. Regardless of the pope's claims to sovereignty, he 

established imperial officials throughout Italy. In the mean- 

* This subjection of England to the empire, which to Henry seemed 
so important, was of course merely nominal. The English paid no 
attention to it. In this the futility of all Henry's efforts may be seen. 
The imperial sovereignty of the world was but a will-o'-the-wisp. 



234 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

time both Tancred and his only son, who was to succeed him, 
had died (1194), and Henry found little difficulty in taking pos- 
session of the Sicilian kingdom. 

Lord of a large part of the west, Henry was now in a position 
to turn his attention to the east. That he had not long before 
this been excommunicated was due to the fact that the ruling 
Plans to P^P^) Coelestine III (1191-1198), was a weak and 
"Restore" dccrcpit old man, who lacked the courage to pro- 

the Empire. , ' . . . , 

ceed to extreme measures. At the same time he 
was so eager to bring about a crusade that he was willing to 
make almost any concessions. Accordingly, when Henry VI 
announced his intention of going on a crusade, Coelestine III 
willingly forgave all and made peace with him. Henry was, of 
course, not in the least interested in a crusade as such, but it 
fitted well into his great plan of restoring the empire to its 
ancient boundaries. His crusade had for its object not merely 
the acquisition of Palestine but also the conquest of the Greek 
empire. For this, however, he needed a pretext to justify him- 
self in the eyes of the Christian world. 

And just at that moment a plausible pretext presented itself. 
Irene, the daughter of the Greek emperor, Isaac Angelus, had 
been married to the son of Tancred and had fallen into the 

hands of Henry VI when he took possession of 

The Pretext 

for Attacking Palermo. This young widow he married to his 
Em^rT^ brother, Philip, duke of Suabia, in the hope that 
through her his family might acquire a claim to the 
Greek throne. Isaac was a weak and inefficient ruler, and his 
position was daily becoming more insecure. In his need he 
appealed to Henry for help. This Henry promised, and at the 
same time sent his ambassadors to Constantinople to demand 
a large tribute, the cession of nearly all the Balkan peninsula, 
and a Greek fleet to aid him in the crusade he was about to 
make. If his demands were not granted Henry threatened to 
attack the Greek empire. A sudden change gave Henry a still 
better pretext. In an insurrection (1195) Isaac was dethroned 
and his brother Alexius made emperor in his place. With 
characteristic cruelty Alexius blinded Isaac and imprisoned him 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1152-1198 235 

and his young son, who was afterward known as Alexius IV. 
Henry VI made preparations to invade the Greek empire, in 
order, as he said, to avenge Isaac and restore him to the throne, 
but in reality to seize the crown for himself. 

During all this time Henry was busily engaged in enrolling 
crusaders, and as fast as possible sending them to the east. 
He himself found much to do in the west, and continually put 

off his departure. He carefully laid his plans for 
Armenia the extension of his power in the east. The kings 
ffinT^^ ^° of Cyprus and of Armenia became his vassals and 

promised to aid him not only against the Moham- 
medans but also against the Greeks. Although his plan was so 
great as to be chimerical, yet success seemed within his grasp 

when a brief illness cut him ofi (1197). His death 

put an end to his gigantic undertaking, and all that 
he had accomplished was quickly undone, because he left no 
one able to continue his policy. He had but one son, not 
quite three years old, afterward famous as Frederick II. The 
advantages which he had gained for the empire over the papacy 
were lost. Although Henry had already persuaded the nobles to 
elect his infant son king, a contest arose over the crown, which 
for some years involved Germany in civil war. The papacy, on 
the other hand, grew incomparably stronger. Coelestine III 
was succeeded by Innocent III (11 98-1 2 16), one of the great- 
est of all popes. So this period, like the first one, ended with 
the papacy in the ascendancy. 



CHAPTER XIII 

THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN PAPACY AND EMPIRE. 
THE THIRD PERIOD (1198-1254) 

With the pontificate of Innocent III (1198-1216) the papacy 
became, in fact, what it had long aspired to be, the super- 
national power of Europe, disposing of crowns and dignities, 
Supremacy of deposing emperors and kings, settling international 
Innocent III, disputcs, and with supreme assurance controlling 
the internal affairs of all countries. Innocent might 
S.B., 1 14-115. ^^jj be called the arbiter of Europe, for there was 
no one able successfully to resist him. The universal monarchy 
which Gregory VII tried to erect, Innocent completed, and he 
also rounded out the theory on which it was based. His writ- 
ings, especially his letters, are rich in passages to 
prove (i) that the pope is the absolute governor of 
the church, with unlimited power over it; (2) that the pope is 
superior to all secular powers; and (3) that they must obey him 
in all things, temporal as well as spiritual. " As God, the creator 
of the universe, set two great lights in the firmament of the 
heaven, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to 
rule the night (Gen. i : 15-16), so He set two great dignities in 
the firmament of the universal church, ... the greater to 
rule the day, that is, souls, and the lesser to rule the night, 
that is, bodies. These dignities are the papal authority and 
the royal power. And just as the moon gets her light from the 
sun, and is inferior to the sun in quality, quantity, position, and 
effect, so the royal power gets the splendor of its dignity from 
the papal authority." ''The hand of the Lord has raised us 
from the dust and set us upon the throne that we may sit in 
judgment not only with the rulers of the world, but over them." 
"There is a king set over each kingdom, but St. Peter and his 
successors are set over the whole world." "The church is free 
only where she possesses complete sovereignty in both spiritual 

236 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 237 

and temporal affairs." The government of the whole world 
in both spiritual and temporal matters — a colossal task — 
rested upon the shoulders of the pope. 

This task Innocent III set himself with great zeal and prac- 
tical wisdom to perform. In a long and stubborn contest with 
John of England, during which he put England under the inter- 
dict* (1208) and excommunicated the king (1209), 
and England, he obtained one of his greatest successes. He 
SB 126 120 humbled John and forced him to admit that Eng- 
land was a papal fief and to accept the crown at his 
hands (12 13). Upon England he levied a feudal tax of one 
thousand silver marks, which John promised should be paid 
annually. 

With France Innocent's success was not so decisive. He 
attempted to interfere in the quarrel between Philip II and 
John of England, but Philip luckily evaded recognizing him 
France ^^ ^^^ feudal lord. In a moral question, however, 

Philip was compelled to submit to Innocent's judg- 
ment. In 1 1 93 he had married a Danish princess, 
Ingeborg, in the hope that he would thereby secure Denmark's 
aid in his war against England. He immediately divorced her, 
and she appealed to the pope. When Innocent came to the 
papal throne he espoused her cause and ordered Philip to re- 
store her to her rightful position as wife and queen. Philip 
refused to do so, and a long struggle ensued. Innocent put 
France under the interdict (1200), and threatened the king with 
excommunication. Not, however, until 12 13 did Philip entirely 
submit to the will of the pope and receive Ingeborg as his wife. 
The kings of Spain, Denmark, and Norway, submitted to 
his claims; his authority was recognized in Bo- 
Countries, hemia and Poland; and by the success of the 
S.B 123-128 ^o^^th crusade he became the feudal lord of the 
so-called Latin empire established in Constan- 
tinople. In fact, under Innocent III the papacy was at the 
height of its political power. 

* That Is, he forbade all church services, sacraments, and Christian 
burial. 



238 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

We are interested here chiefly in his relations with the em- 
pire. Henry VI had, as we have seen, set up an imperial 
government throughout Italy. His authority was established 
Innocent and ^^^^ ^^ Rome, for the prefect (mayor) of the city 
the Empire, was his official, receiving the investiture of his 
Establishes a office from him (contrary to the terms of the peace 
Government ^^ Constancc). Innocent's first work was to de- 
in Italy and gtroy this imperial government and to put a papal 

government in its place. The day after his corona- 
., 123 12 . ^.^^ j^^ compelled the prefect of Rome to take an 
oath of allegiance to him and to do him liege homage. Thus he 
proceeded until in central and southern Italy not an imperial 
official was left. The situation in Sicily made his victory there 
easy. Constance, the widow of Henry VI, disliked the Ger- 
mans and tried to drive them out of the kingdom. Many of 
them refused to go and, fortifying themselves in their castles, 
made war on her. In her extremity she turned to the pope, 
and, although Henry VI had never admitted that Sicily was a 
papal fief, she begged Innocent to invest her little son, Fred- 
erick II, with it. She agreed that the kingdom should pay 
the pope annually one thousand gold coins as feudal dues. 
Constance died in 11 98, after appointing Innocent both guard- 
ian and regent for her son. Nothing could have fitted more 
perfectly into the plans of Innocent than this arrangement. 

In Germany also the course of events favored Innocent, for 
the death of Henry VI was followed by a contested royal elec- 
tion which plunged that unfortunate country into civil war. 

Henry had obtained from the German princes the 
Disputed election of his infant son as king, but, on the death 
Election in of Henry, the Guelf* party refused to recognize 
Germany. ^Yiq child and eagerly sought a suitable candidate 
S. B., 130. from their own party. Henry had intrusted his 

interests to his brother Philip, duke of Suabia, who 
hastened to Germany to secure that country for his nephew. 
Many princes, although wishing to maintain their fidelity to 

* The Hohenstaufen were commonly called the Ghibellines, and their 
opponents were known as the Guelfs. 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 239 

the Hohenstaufen, were unwilling to subject Germany to the 
ills that would certainly attend the rule of a boy king, and 
they fairly forced the crown upon Philip. Seeing that the cause 
of his nephew was hopeless, Philip finally yielded and accepted 
the election (March, 11 98). The Guelf party, having renewed 
the alliance with Richard Lionheart, and having come to an 
agreement with Innocent, elected as anti-king, Otto IV, the 
youngest son of Henry the Lion, the deposed duke of Saxony.* 
The rival kings prepared to fight, but at the same time both 
appealed to the pope for recognition and confirmation, not only 
as king of Germany but also as emperor. Innocent declared 
that it was his duty to decide in such cases, because the em- 
pire was a papal fief, deriving its origin and authority from the 
papacy; he also declared that the pope alone could create an 
emperor, crown him, and invest him with the empire. He 
put off his decision, however, as long as he could, because he 
was taking advantage of the situation to destroy the imperial 
government in Italy. Not till 1201 did he publish 

The Decision ..... -r- r ^ • ^ 

of Innocent, his decision. It was a foregone conclusion, however, 
SB 1^0 ^^^^ ^^ would support Otto, who had already prom- 
ised to concede all the papal demands. In a re- 
markable document he most ingeniously discussed the claims 
of the three candidates (Frederick II, Philip of Suabia, and 
Otto IV), examining the legality of the election of each, the 
fitness of each for the position, and the expediency from the 
point of view of the church of recognizing him. 

This decision of the pope had, of course, not the slightest 

effect. Philip made an alliance with Philip II of 

rugg e. pj.g^j^^g^ ^^^ Q^^Q sought help of John of England. 

13^ 134 ^' As Philip began to lose ground he tried to win Inno- 
cent's support by offering him large concessions. 
Innocent, however, refused, and the war was continued. 
Finally, in 1206, the fortune of war changed; Philip drove his 

* Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony, had refused to bring his army 
into Italy to aid Frederick Barbarossa; so after the battle of Legnano 
(1176), Frederick deposed him and drove him out of the country. 
Cf. S. B., 112. 



240 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

rival from the field, and Innocent, a practical man, who reck- 
oned with facts and made the best of them, recognized him 
as king. Peace was virtually concluded between them and 
Philip was firmly established in power, when he was basely 
murdered by his vassal, the palatine count. Otto of Wittelsbach. 
It was an act of personal vengeance, because Philip had broken 
his promise to give his daughter to Otto in marriage. 

All Germany was shocked by the news of this tragic event, 
which left the field clear for Otto IV. In a short time he suc- 
ceeded in conciliating the German princes, and the pope joy- 
fully confirmed him as king and promised him the 
Turns imperial crown. To receive this he went to Rome 

the Pope (1209). A bitter disappointment was in store for 
Innocent. For after the coronation Otto IV, with 
remarkable firmness, adopted the policy of the Hohenstaufen; 
he demanded of the pope all the land and rights which Henry 
VI had possessed at the time of his death; he appointed im- 
perial officials in all the papal territory; he compelled the pre- 
fect of Rome to do him homage; and finally, disregarding the 
rights of Frederick II, in 12 10 he invaded the kingdom of Sicily 
with the intention of adding it to his possessions. For these 
offenses Innocent deposed and excommunicated him (12 10) 
and sought to raise up enemies against him in Germany. In 
this he succeeded beyond expectation, because the German 
princes were opposed to Otto's attempt to seize Sicily. A 
^ , . , „ large number of them accordingly turned to Fred- 

Fredenck II. ° 1 i . i • / 

enck II and elected him kmg (12 11). Innocent 
had some misgivings about confirming the action of the 
princes, because he did not wish Sicily and Germany to be 
held by one and the same person, lest the papal claim to the 
feudal lordship of Sicily should thereby be weakened. Never- 
theless, no other possible candidate was to be found. Conse- 
quently Innocent determined to support Frederick. 

To prevent complications, Frederick had his son, then only 
a year old, crowned king of Sicily. He again acknowledged 
that he held Sicily as a papal fief, and for it he renewed his 
homage to Innocent. Without any reservation he conceded 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 241 

everything that Innocent demanded. Putting the regency of 
Sicily in the hands of his wife, he boldly set out to win the 
s B., 134, 135. crown which his great ancestors had worn. Clev- 
erly avoiding the guards which Otto IV had placed 
Bouvines, at the passes of the Alps to intercept him, he 
^^^'^' reached Germany, where he was re-elected and 

crowned (12 12). He renewed the alliance with Philip II of 
France, who was at war with England and with some of his 
great vassals in the Netherlands. As neither Otto IV nor 
Frederick could gain a decisive victory in Germany, Otto de- 
termined to carry the war into France, and with King John 
planned a double invasion of that country. Both of them were 
unsuccessful; John met with so vigorous a resistance in Poitou 
that he could make no progress, and Philip II administered a 
crushing defeat to Otto and his allies* (12 14, at Bouvines, a 
village in Belgium, near Lille). By this defeat Otto's power 
was broken, and he withdrew to his estates in Saxony, where 

* It must be regarded as a sign of progress that we find here, for the 
first time during the Middle Age, something Hke international politics 
and alliances. The Guelfs in their contest with the Hohenstaufen 

had made an alliance with the lower Rhine provinces and 

International -^^ith the king of England, while the Hohenstaufen were 

ances. leagued with the king of France. There was enmity be- 

S. B., 131, 132. tween France and England because the English king held 

a large part of French territory, and the French king was 
trying to wrest it from him. Cologne and the provinces about the 
mouth of the Rhine already carried on a considerable commerce with 
England, on account of which they preferred the friendship of England 
to that of their French or German neighbors on the continent. There 
was also a political reason why the lower Rhine provinces allied them- 
selves with the enemies of France: possessing a large measure of in- 
dependence, they feared the French king because he was trying to get 
possession of them and subject them to the French crown. This inter- 
national alliance, having been joined by Sicily, had caused the em- 
peror, Henry VI, much anxiety. It was not so dangerous, however, 
as it seemed, since its members were so far apart that they were not 
able to render efficient aid to one another. Henry VI was successful 
in conquering Sicily, and by a piece of good fortune Richard, king of 
England, fell into his hands as a prisoner. Against Henry VI the alli- 
ance was thus rendered powerless. The coalition was renewed against 
Frederick II and promised to be more effective. It was their troops, 
however, that the king of France overcame in the battle of Bou- 
vines. 



242 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

he spent the rest of his life, without, however, submitting to his 
victorious rival. He died in 1218. 

Meeting with no further effective opposition, Frederick II 
was soon accepted throughout Germany as king. His success 
meant the success of Innocent, for Frederick had already 
Frederick II ^^^^ ^^^ broadest conccssions to him, yielding all 
Becomes the points at issue between the empire and the 
papacy. Frederick's next desire was the acquisi- 
tion of the imperial crown. This Innocent was willing to grant. 
He first, however, secured from Frederick the promise that as 
soon as he should be crowned emperor he would resign the 
Sicilian crown to his son and release him from all paternal 
authority. Frederick declared that he made this promise be- 
cause, "if we should become emperor and at the same time be 
king of Sicily, it might be inferred that the kingdom of Sicily 
belonged to the empire, and such an inference would do injury 
to the Roman church." 

In ecclesiastical affairs. Innocent's success and mastery were 
as complete as in political matters. He developed an aston- 
ishing activity, sending his legates everywhere and through 
them controlling everything with a master hand. 
and Heresy. One of his most difficult tasks was the suppression 
s B 116-118 ^^ heresy. The twelfth century is noted for the 
development and spread of heretical sects. An- 
cient heresies were revived and fused with new ones. Various 
were the ideas advanced: most common perhaps was the gnos- 
tic or Manichaean belief in the existence of two Gods, the one 
good, the other evil, and the corollary of this, that matter itself 
is evil; it was widely believed that the marriage relation was 
sinful; the Old Testament was rejected, and the sacraments of 
the church were the object of bitter attacks. Often ascetic 
in temperament, these heretics railed at the worldliness of the 
clergy; some declared that the priests were Pharisees and the 
pope the successor not of Christ but of Constantine. Many 
of them rejected all the ritual of the church and made one of 
their own; instead of baptism with water some believed in a 
baptism with the spirit alone; some practised the laying on of 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 243 

hands, and rejected the use of images, fasting, purgatory, the 
taking of oaths, and the death penalty. They were known by 
many names, some of which were derived from local leaders: 
Manichaeans, Cathari, Petrobrussians, Henricians, Bogomiles, 
Patareni, Waldensians, Albigensians, and others. The great 
wealth of the bishops and their immersion in secular affairs 
had led to the belief in the sinfulness of property and the cor- 
responding holiness of poverty {cf. the Poor Men of Lyons, and 
the Arnoldists, named from Arnold of Brescia). Differing as 
these sects did, one from another, they were alike in their op- 
position to the church and in their criticism of the pope and of 
the clergy. They had, as Gregory DC said, ''different faces, 
but their tails were bound together." 

Against these heretics Innocent III took vigorous measures. 
He sent his legates to combat them and ordered all in authority 
to do their utmost to crush them. He directed that heretics 
Le ates should be exiled or put to death, and gave those 

who prosecuted them the right to confiscate their 

property. The Dominican order was established 
by St. Dominic for the special purpose of reclaiming heretics. 
One of the main principles on which the Franciscan order was 
founded was the sinfulness of property, but the pope was wise 
enough to render this feature of the order harmless, and to 
prevent it from becoming hostile to the church. These two 
orders became the most efficient papal aids in suppressing heresy. 
In this connection a word may be said about the inquisition. 
So wide-spread was heresy that it was soon found that papal 
legates could by no means do all that was necessary. The 

next step was to put the matter into the hands of 
Inquisition, the bishops, thus forming an episcopal inquisition. 

In 1 1 84 Pope Lucius III ordered each archbishop 
and bishop to inquire (hence inquisition) at least once a year of 
three or more men of good reputation in the diocese whether 
they knew of any who were guilty of heresy, and to compel 
them on oath to reveal the names of all such. This action was 
repeated by Innocent III in the Later an council (12 15). The 
council of Toulouse (1229) renewed it, and ordered each bishop 



> 



244 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

to appoint one priest and two or three laymen in each parish to 
seek out the heretics. The bishops, however, were, as Greg- 
ory IX thought, entirely too mild in their treatment of here- 
tics, and so in 1232 and 1233 he created the papal inquisition 
by intrusting the Dominican order with the duty of seeking 
out and punishing heresy. Punishment was to be inflicted 
according to the degree of guilt, and consisted in fasting, pil- 
grimages, payments of money, imprisonment, maiming, or 
death. As the clergy were not permitted because of their 
sacerdotal character to shed blood, secular officials were called 
on to inflict the severer punishments. To us, accustomed as 
we are to the idea of religious liberty — the right of each one to 
believe what he will — the inquisition seems especially cruel, 
and the men who used it, as well as those who invented it, as 
peculiarly bloodthirsty and inhuman. Such, however, was not 
necessarily the case. The church punished heresy for exactly 
the same reason, and, according to the ideas of the time, with 
exactly the same justice, that a modern state punishes treason 
in its subjects. In those times the church quite naturally re- 
garded heresy as treason. ^ 

Innocent III was not merely a statesman. He was not 
submerged in his efforts to build up a colossal institution which 
should exercise supreme authority over both the church and 

political governments. He was also a theologian: 
and°Dogma. ^^ defended the doctrines of the church against 

the attacks of heretics, defined more clearly the 
dogma of the Trinity, and developed the dogma of transub- 
stantiation and made it a part of the official creed of the church. 
„ - He was also a sane and earnest reformer, with an 

Reforms. ^ ' 

eye open to all the abuses and wrongs which needed 
' reforming. He possessed a consuming zeal for 
clean morals and holy living. While engaged in political 
plans which embraced all Europe and parts of Asia and Africa 
— in fact all the world that was known to him — he labored 
with equal energy to improve the spiritual condition of both 
the clergy and the laity. He ordered bishops carefully to over- 
gee the morals of their clergy and severely to punish all who 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 245 

were guilty of improper conduct. In the Middle Age preach- 
ing was not regarded as an essential part of church services; 
consequently it was not necessarily a part of the education of 
the clergy, many of whom seldom or never attempted to preach. 
Innocent, however, recognizing the educational and devotional 
value of it, commanded the bishops to preach and to appoint 
clergy throughout their dioceses who were able and fitted to 
do the same. He directed that at least two teachers should be 
connected with every cathedral and with every church which 
had a sufficient endowment to pay them. One of these was 
to instruct the clergy of the neighborhood in secular branches, 
the other in theology and in the duties of the clerical office. 
He prescribed rules for the dress and conduct of the clergy; 
he ordered them to devote themselves seriously to the duties 
of their office and regularly to attend the daily and nightly 
services, and he forbade them to engage in business, to be 
present at theatrical performances, to play dice, to frequent 
inns and public places, to drink to excess, to wear costly or 
showy ornaments and gaudy and gay clothing. Since, as he 
said, the care of souls is ''the art of arts," he directed the 
bishops to exercise the greatest care to ordain as priests only 
those who were in every way qualified for the office, and to 
instruct them thoroughly in divine things; they should reject 
all candidates who were ignorant or who did not lead holy 
lives. He also forbade the clergy to hold more than one office 
or living. He forbade the practice of simony, especially in 
monasteries, and condemned usury, a term then used to de- 
note the taking of interest, without regard to 

o. B., 119. 

whether the rate was excessive or not. He mani- 
fested a humane spirit in forbidding the molestation or perse- 
cution of Jews. He ordained that every Christian should at 
least once a year confess his sins to his parish priest and seek 
absolution of them. 

The dearest wish of his heart — a great and successful crusade 
— ^he did not live to see fulfilled. From the beginning of his 
pontfficate to its very end he labored day and night for it. 
It grieved him beyond measure that the fourth crusade was 



246 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

turned from its original purpose and directed against Constan- 
tinople, but after it was an accomplished fact he endeavored 
to make the best and the most of it. In 12 13 he 
' ' called a universal council for the purpose of mak- 

?Crusade ^^S arrangements to recover the holy land and to 
reform the whole church. He directed all bishops 
to exercise great care in noting everything that needed reform 
that the council might do its work intelligently and thoroughly. 

The Fourth ^^ ^^^ ^^ '^^'^5 ^^ the Latcran church in Rome 
Lateran (hence called the fourth Lateran council). More 

than twelve hundred bishops and abbots were 
present besides the representatives of many others. With 
astonishing speed (only three sessions were held) the council 
examined into the condition of the church and passed about 
seventy acts, most of them reformatory in character. Under 
the presidency of Innocent it defined dogmas, condemned here- 
sies, and ordained reforms. It crowned its labors with a com- 
prehensive plan for a crusade. Europe, it seemed, was about 
to respond to this imperative call: Frederick II took the cru- 
sader's vow, and all the west began to equip itself for a supreme 
effort, when the death of Innocent (1216) put an end to the 
preparations. 

The death of Innocent had another important effect. He had 
been the guardian of Frederick II, had made him king of Sicily 
and protected his rights there, had made him king of Ger- 
F d * kii ^^^y> ^^^ h^^ promised him the imperial crown. 
Changes Frederick recognized his obligations to Innocent 

Policy. 

and showed his gratitude by obeying him im- 
plicitly. The death of Innocent, howev^er, produced a marked 
change in him. He was no doubt conscious of the imperial 
ideal and of the inherent contradiction between the imperial 
and papal theories. True to the tradition of his family, he 
now developed a policy which led him more and more into op- 
position to the pope. The crown of Sicily was the first point of 
contention. Papal interest demanded that Sicily should never 
be held by an emperor, lest he should renew the imperial claim 
to it. The Lateran council decreed that Frederick II should 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 247 

not be crowned emperor until he had made his little son, Henry 
[VII], king of Sicily and had resigned the kingdom to him. In 
1 2 16 Frederick had promised that as soon as he had been made 
emperor he would free his son from all paternal control and 
permit him to hold Sicily as a papal fief, entirely independent 
of the empire. In spite of his promise, however, Frederick was 
determined to retain Sicily in his own hands, not only because 
he loved it better than any other coimtry, but also and chiefly 
because of the large revenues which he derived from it. After 
crowning his son king of Sicily he sent him off to Germany 
and carefully laid his plans to have him elected king of that 
country also. These plans he brought to a successful issue 
in 1220, when Henry [VII] was elected and crowned 
i22c2t242. king of Germany, The pope, Honorius III (1216- 
1227), whose great age and ill health increased the 
natural mildness of his character, was displeased with this, but 
under the influence of Frederick's promise to go on a crusade 
and to protect the possessions of the church, he yielded to the 
inevitable. He not only crowned Frederick emperor (1220), 
but even permitted him to retain the title of king of Sicily and 
to exercise the functions of that ofl&ce. 

In the contention about Sicily Frederick scored a victory 
over the pope and yet retained his friendship. In other matters 
he was not so fortunate. These were (i) the re-establishment 
of the imperial administration in Italy, which had 
o/ouarrel been destroyed by Innocent III, and (2) the develop- 
ment of a strong royal government in Sicily. Im- 
mediately after his coronation he set about both these tasks. 
In one province of Italy after another he established his im- 
perial officials, and in Sicily he took steps to diminish the power 
of the pope and of the nobility. That Honorius III did not 
excommunicate him at once was due to the fact that his heart 
was set on a crusade and for this he needed the support of the 
emperor — Frederick had taken the cross at the Lateran council 
(12 1 5) and had renewed his vow in 1220. In spite, however, 
of papal commands and threats he continually put off the day 
of his departure, because his presence in the west was neces- 



248 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

sary for the realization of his plans there. In 1223 he married 
lolanthe, the daughter and heiress of the king of Jerusalem, 
thus acquiring a right to that kingdom (which was, 
Jerusalem." however, almost entirely in the hands of the Mo- 
hammedans). After the marriage he assumed the 
title of king of Jerusalem. Finally, in 1225, he yielded to the 
papal demands and agreed to go on his crusade in 1227: if 
he should for any cause fail to keep his promise he should by 
that very act be excommunicated. When the time came he 
did indeed set sail, but because of illness and the death of one 
of his advisers he returned two days later. For this the new 
pope, Gregory IX (12 2 7-1 241), excommunicated him. Fred- 
^ , . , TT erick tried in vain to have the ban removed. The 

Frederick H 

Acquires pope was obduratc; so Frederick sailed with the 
ban still upon him (1228). Although the pope's 
emissaries everywhere intrigued against him, he nevertheless 
obtained by diplomacy the surrender of Jerusalem to the 
Christians. 

In the meantime Gregory IX, in order to resist the encroach- 
ments of Frederick's officials, had raised three armies: one of 
these he employed in northern Italy, the second in central 
Italy, and the third he despatched against the king- 
Appeals to dom of Sicily. In the midst of the pope's military 
successes Frederick returned to Italy (1229). In 
San Ger- ^^le field the pope's forces were no match for him 

mano, 1230. ^ ^ 

and a series of victories made him master of the 

S. B., 140-142. . . ^ 1 1 rr 1 c i i 

Situation. Nevertheless, he offered most favorable 
terms to the pope. Peace was accordingly re-established be- 
tween them by the treaty of San Germano (1230), in which 
Frederick made generous concessions. ' 

The peace of San Germano, however, did not prevent Fred- 
erick from continuing his efforts to build up a strong royal 
F d ■ k II P^wer in Sicily and to re-establish the imperial ad- 
Pursues His ministration throughout Italy. In 1231 he re- 

Policy 

modelled the government of Sicily and published a 
new body of laws for it (the constitutions of Sicily). His chief 
object in this was to make his own authority as nearly absolute 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 249 

as possible. He reduced the power of the vassals as well as 
of the high clergy and of the pope. In the administration of 
justice and of the finances he introduced systems that were 
in many respects modern. He established royal judges and 
courts to displace the baronial courts, and he imposed direct 
(land and poll taxes) and indirect taxes (tolls, state monopolies 
in salt, steel, copper, raw silk, and the like, and a tariff on 
imports and exports). By these methods Frederick acquired 
an immense income. This, it has been said, was the first mod- 
ern government in Europe. 

Gregory IX was highly displeased with what Frederick did 
in Sicily, but, if that had been all, would probably have con- 
tented himself with a protest. There was in addition, however, 

Frederick's persistent encroachment upon the pope's 
bard Cities. Sovereignty in Italy. The situation was further 

complicated by Frederick's quarrel with the Lom- 
bard cities. Since the death of Henry VI (1197) those cities 
had been left to themselves, and they had taken advantage of 
the opportunity to increase their independence at the expense 
of the imperial rights which had been fixed by the peace of 
Constance (1183). Soon after his coronation as emperor (1220) 
Frederick II had attempted to exercise the powers which that 
treaty guaranteed to the emperor, but met with armed re- 
sistance. Through the intervention of the pope and others 
war was averted until 1236, when Frederick began to prosecute 
his claims with greater vigor. During the next two years his 
military operations were entirely successful. One after another 
of the cities surrendered or was taken by force, and at Corte- 
nuova (1237) he gained a remarkable victory over the cities, kill- 
ing about ten thousand of their troops. He then prepared to re- 
organize the government of all Italy and to make it thoroughly 

imperial. He began to displace the local (civil) as 
Resists. well as the papal officials with his own. He made 

S B 143 144 ^^^ ^^^' Enzio, king of Sardinia and married him to 

the heiress of its crown. The pope could restrain 
himself no longer, for Sardinia was a papal fief. A heated 
controversy ensued, in which each made charges and counter- 



2SO EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

charges, until the original question was lost sight of. In 1239 
Gregory excommunicated Frederick and anathematized him 
on sixteen different counts, such as seizing papal lands, tax- 
ing, robbing, and destroying churches, preventing the free elec- 
tion of bishops, refusing to permit vacant bishoprics to be filled, 
and proscribing and killing the clergy. 

It was inevitable that a bitter struggle should follow. The 
pope united the Italian cities against Frederick, and Italy was 
again ravaged by war. Frederick's arms were victorious. 
In 1 241 he encamped before Rome, prepared to be- 
succes^es/ siege it, when the death of Gregory put an end 
to the hostilities. After electing a pope who died 
in about two weeks the cardinals fled from Rome, r For nearly 
two years the chair of St. Peter remained vacant, apparently 
because the cardinals could not agree upon any one.*^ Finally 
they elected Innocent IV, who, after a year of parleying, be- 
gan a war of extermination against the emperor and his family. 
He infused new life into the struggle by stirring up the Italian 
cities to renewed efforts. He fled to France and sought to 
enlist the French king in his service. He also fomented a 
rebellion in Germany and brought about the election of an 
anti-king, first, Henry Raspe of Thuringia (i 246-1 247), and then 
Death of William of Holland (i 247-1 256). The death of 
Frederick II, Frederick, in 1250, turned the scale definitely in fa- 
vor of the pope. Frederick's son, Conrad IV, died 
o., 71.^'^^ (1254) in a heroic effort to maintain himself as king 
in Germany. His death was followed by the period 
Terregnum, known as the interregnum (1254-1273), during 
I2S4 12 3. -^hicji there was no recognized king of Germany. 
In Sicily Manfred, an illegitimate son of Frederick II, was 
recognized as king. He possessed in a high degree the ability 
to govern which characterized his family. Under his wise 
sway Sicily recovered its prosperity and enjoyed peace^^ The 
pope, however, was determined to destroy the Hohenstaufen 
family, and in order to drive out the last members of it (Man- 
fred and Conradino, the son of Conrad IV) he called in Charles 



PAPACY AND EMPIRE, 1198-1254 251 

of Anjou, a brother of Louis IX, king of France. The price 

which he paid Charles was the crown of Sicily. 

Anjou Gets Charles was successful in battle, and Manfred was 

"^^^' slain (1266).* Conradino, whose youth had been 

End of the spent in Germany, went to Italy to try to recover 

Sicily, but through the treachery of his troops 
was defeated. A few days later he was taken prisoner and 
beheaded (1268). 

This struggle was an important milestone in the history of 
the world. It was a contest between two great institutions, 
both of which claimed universal authority. '^'For centuries the 

Roman empire had pursued a lofty and alluring 
between^fwo ideal: it had endeavored to destroy all national 
Ii^Stutions" individualism, to obliterate all local and racial 

differences, and to make all peoples alike, to weld 
all nations into one people and into one political unit!. It is 
needless to say that at times all the subjected peoples felt 
this rule to be tyranny. For about two centuries the papacy 
had pursued an ideal not less lofty and alluring: it had sought 
to make the world of one religious faith. That means, how- 
ever, that it had sought to force the world to accept a creed 
made to order and to deprive the individual of his right to make 
his own creed. It sought unity in place of the living variety 
which is the result of individual thought. The victory was 

with the papacy. For the empire as for the Hohen- 
the^Empke. staufen family, the struggle was fatal. To be sure, 

the empire continued to exist for some centuries 
(to 1806), but only in name. Few of the later kings of Germany 
took the trouble to go to Rome for the imperial crown. Most 

* Nothing more clearly shows the bitterness of the hatred engendered 
by this long strife than the savage treatment of the members of Man- 
fred's family. Death set free his wife after five years of imprison- 
ment, and a daughter after eighteen years of close imprisonment. One 
of his sons lived to endure the tortures of a prison for more than fifty 
years. Another son escaped from prison, and after begging from the 
court of one country to another throughout Europe, died at last in 
Egypt, a guest of the sultan, who gave him the alms denied him by 
Christian rulers. 



252 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of them saw that it was impossible to unite the two countries, 
and consequently resigned all pretension to authority over 
Italy and Sicily. To accomplish this result the papacy sought 
to exercise a political sovereignty not less complete than that 
of the empire. It is also needless to say that the rule of the 
church would be felt by many to be both a political and a re- 
ligious tyranny. The world was growing away from the uni- 
versal and toward the individual. The papacy, with its univer- 
sal creed and its universal political power, had gained a victory, 
but this victory was to be brief. At the very threshold of his 
triumph the pope recognized, but underrated, the powers of 
the new enemy that was about to take up the struggle. 
"Some asserted that the pope [Gregory IX] de- 
iSivrduaS'^ sired above all else utterly to crush Frederick, whom 
RetS'the'' ^^ called the great dragon, in order that he might 
"Universal" then destroy the kings of England and of France 
Pop^^ ^ and the other Christian kings, whom he called 

o T, . kinglets and little serpents." For the moment the 
b. a., 145. » r- • , .1 

pope's cause was victorious, but over against the 

growing individualism of nations and persons, the pope was 

supporting a losing cause. The empire had been universal in 

name only. This nominal universal was displaced by another 

which really tried to be universal. Its efforts, however, merely 

hastened its own overthrow and the victory of the individual 

nation and of the individual man. 



CHAPTER XIV 

MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 

The Arabic population of Arabia was divided into many 
tribes which were further subdivided into groups called clans 
or families, each of which consisted of all those who were re- 
lated by blood through the male line. Their govern- 
ment was patriarchal: the oldest member of the 
OrgaSzadon ^^^ty (dan) was generally its patriarch, to whom 
all the other members were subject. In all family 
affairs the patriarch's will was law. Each tribe had also its 
patriarch, who was assisted by the patriarchs of the families 
which composed it. The tribe, through its patriarch and chief 
men, managed its affairs, governed and controlled its members, 
and administered justice among them. Even in the largest 
cities, which were inhabited by many tribes, centralized govern- 
ment was practically unknown, although the leading men of 
all the tribes represented in the city acted together as a kind of 
city council to decide the few questions which were of general 
pubUc concern. The tribes were so jealous of their indepen- 
dence that little progress toward the formation of a state could 
be made. The patriarchal form of government was to them 
adequate because many of the tribes were still nomadic; only 
a few of them had fixed abodes, and these chiefly in towns and 
villages. The primitive, vigorous sons of the desert preferred 
the unencumbered freedom of tent-dwellers. 

The intertribal relations of the Arabs were such as are com- 
monly found among primitive peoples, being controlled by the 
law of retaliation or blood vengeance. That is, each tribe was 
bound to avenge an insult or injury to any of its 
Vengeanca members, and consequently bloody feuds were of 
frequent occurrence. Since community of descent 
was to them the only conceivable bond of social union, blood 
relationship was of fundamental importance. Each family 

253 



254 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

was, in fact, a little state in which citizenship was determined 
by blood relationship. A man without a family was without a 
country; he was common prey because there was no state to 
protect him and to avenge a wrong done to him. The low 
stage of civilization among the Arabs made protection a matter 
of chief importance. Treachery, vindictiveness, and cruelty 
were prominent traits of their character.* 

The religion of the Arabs was quite as primitive as their 
government, ranging from fetich to star worship. They peo- 
pled the earth, air, and sky with a host of malicious and ca- 
Reiigion. pricious as well as friendly spirits, such as genii 

(djins), ogres, and demons, all of which played a 
Religious great part in their literature {cf. The Arabian Nights^ 

Tales). They had learned of fire-worship from the 
Persians, of Judaism from the Jews, and of Christianity from 
the people of Egypt and Abyssinia. Their religion, besides 
being powerless to improve their morals, lacked also those in- 
spiring elements which would tend to raise them in the scale of 
civilization. For some centuries the Arabs had made but 
little progress. Yet their religion had not been entirely with- 
out effect upon them, for it forbade all acts of violence every- 
where during certain holy months and seasons and prohibited 

them altogether in the neighborhood of temples and 

Commerce. " ° ... 

altars. Under the protection which religion thus 
furnished, commerce flourished. During these holy seasons 
caravans moved unmolested across the country, and, in the 
security which the holy places gave them, merchants exposed 
their wares for sale. Important fairs or markets grew up 
about the temples, and people, drawn by the double attraction 
of security and trade, settled near them, thus forming cities 
and towns. The situation of Arabia was favorable to the de- 
velopment of commerce, lying, as it does, on the boundary 
between Asia and Africa and having the double advantage 

* In the northern part of the peninsula and along the coast there 
was a numerous Jewish population living for the most part in separate 
colonies or villages; in their government they did not differ materially 
from the Arab tribes abput them. 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 255 

of trade by sea and by land. Caravan routes were established, 
connecting all parts of Arabia with the rest of Asia and with 
northern Africa. Moreover, by sea the Arabs carried on an 
extensive trade with India, with the far east, and with Africa. 
Of all the cities of Arabia, Mecca held the first place, both in 
commerce and in religion. Its markets or fairs were famous 
and were visited by throngs of merchants from distant cities, 
^^ and its streets were crowded with the nomadic 

hordes which inhabited the uplands of central Ara- 
bia. Its temple, called from its shape the Caaba 
(cube), had become a national sanctuary, the holiest spot of all 
Arabia. To the solid commercial advantages to be derived 
from a visit to Mecca the Caaba added another, more attractive, 
perhaps, though less substantial — the opportunity to appease 
the gods and to win their favor. 

Such was the state of Arabic society when Mohammed was 
born at Mecca, about 569. Of his early life little is known with 
certainty. His family was poor and he was compelled to per- 
-, , - form menial labor, but his marriage with a rich 

Mohammed. . ., •^ ° 

widow, Khadijeh, whom he had served as camel- 
driver, raised him to a position of ease and influence. When 
about forty years old he developed an absorbing interest in 
rehgion and received, as he came to believe, divine revelations, 
which he felt obliged to preach to the people of Mecca. The 
substance of these revelations, put into the briefest form possi- 
ble, is that there is but one God, Allah; he commands all men 
to practise certain virtues; those who obey him he wHl re- 
ward with eternal life and happiness in a paradise of delights, 
but he will punish in a hell of torments all who despise his 
commands. In consequence of the mockery with which he 
was met, Mohammed attempted to secure a respectful hearing 
by constantly reasserting his official position as the prophet 
of God. Opposition forced him to emphasize his relation to 
God and to put his own person more and more emphatically 
into the foreground, and soon he demanded from all the confes- 
sion: "There is no God but Allah and Mohammed is hir 
prophet." 



256 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Mohammed's success was slow but substantial. Although 
the Meccans generally mocked him, laughed at his announce- 
ment of a day of divine judgment, and scorned his claim to be 
^^. ^ a prophet of God, he won, in the course of a dozen 

His Success, * ^ 

years or more, some 300 persons to his faith. 
Many of these were of the humblest rank, but a few of them 
were choice souls who were to be Mohammed's chief supporters 
and the most zealous propagators of his religion. Although his 
converts came from all the tribes which inhabited Mecca, they 
formed a little congregation closely bound to Allah, to Mo- 
hammed, and to each other; each one took an oath faithfully 
to obey Allah and his prophet, to pray at the regularly appointed 
times, and for the support of the poor to contribute a small 
sum which was regarded as an offering or atonement for his sins. 
To the Meccans this new society seemed to be revolutionary 
and dangerous because it was established not on the bond of 
blood relationship — of community of descent — but on that of 
^ ^. community of religious belief; for Mohammed 

Persecution ^ ® ' 

of His declared that if a believer was injured for God's 

cause, all other believers were his blood avengers. 
The Meccans were alarmed at the success of Mohammed in es- 
tablishing such a new society. They accordingly resorted to 
persecution. Many of his followers, being forced to flee, went 
to Abyssinia, where they found freedom from persecution. The 
condition of those who remained in Mecca grew worse, and at 
length Mohammed foresaw that he and all his followers must 
seek safety elsewhere. He began to fear even for himself, 
for although his family had thus far protected him against all 
violence, its patriarch was no longer well disposed toward him 
and might at any moment withdraw his protecting favor and 
expel him from the family. After vainly appealing to several 
tribes for admission and protection, he finally persuaded some 
men from Medina to accept his faith, and they in- 
aiejra),^622. vited him and all his faithful to come and live in 
their city. The invitation was gladly accepted and 
the society withdrew to Medina (622). This "flight" (Hegira) 
of Mohammed was an event of such importance in his ca- 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 257 

reer that his followers reckoned time from it; and not un- 
justly, for it does indeed mark an era in Mohammed's develop- 
ment. 

Mohammed had acquired nearly all his religious ideas from 
the Jews. From the first he had believed that he was preach- 
ing the true religion of Abraham and he labored with as much 

zeal to win the approbation of the Jews as to re- 
^d Tbe^ews. ^^^^^ ^he Arabs. Nothing shows more conclusively 

his shallow theological knowledge and his simple 
religious enthusiasm than the fact that he believed himself in 
harmony with both Jews and Christians. ''Believers (Moham- 
medans), Jews, and Christians ... if they believe in God and 
the judgment day and do good, receive their reward (life in 
paradise) from their Lord" (Koran, surah 2:58). Their re- 
ligions and his were revelations from the same God and there- 
fore could not conflict. Whenever the Jews disagreed with 
him he naively declared that they had corrupted their religion 
and no longer held to the truth as it had originally been re- 
vealed to them. Although he held the Caaba at Mecca in high 
reverence, he honored Jerusalem still more by adopting the 
Jewish custom of turning the face toward it in prayer {cf. 
Daniel 6 : 10). 

On reaching Medina Mohammed redoubled his efforts to 
win the Jews, many colonies of whom were established in and 

about the city. For about a year he labored with 
the'^Arabs. them, but ou all hands met only with insolent 

rebuffs. Angered at their persistent hardness of 
heart, and convinced that further efforts with them would be 
wasted, he denounced them and turned from them to his own 
people. Islam (submission to the will of God), as he called his 
new religion, was thereafter to be the national religion of the 
Arabs. He was shrewd enough to perceive that, if he would 
win them, he must start from a common standing-ground. To 
this end he determined to make Mecca his holy city and the 
Caaba the seat of his religion. Accordingly he deposed Jeru- 
salem from its place of honor and began to turn his face toward 
Mecca in prayer. He commanded all believers to honor the 



258 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Caaba and to visit it in pilgrimages, although the city was at 
that time in the hands of his enemies and no Mohammedan was 
permitted to enter it. 

In order to justify this change from Jerusalem to the Caaba, 
Mohammed resorted to an invention. He enlarged the tradi- 
tion about Abraham and made him an Arab and the father of 
Inventions ^^^ Arabs, the builder of the Caaba, and the founder 
about of Islam. According to this tale, God had made a 

covenant with Abraham in Mecca, had helped him 
build the Caaba, had instituted religious ceremonies in it, and 
had commanded pilgrimages to be made to it; Ishmael and not 
Isaac was Abraham's favored son and helper; and Abraham 
had foretold in prophecy the advent of the great prophet, 
Mohammed. 

The invention was successful and served a purpose which 
had been ripening in Mohammed's mind ever since his expulsion 
from Mecca. Being an Arab, Mohammed was vindictive, 
and his desire to take vengeance on the Meccans had grown 
till it had now completely taken possession of him. Up to 
that time Mohammed had preached peace, and had apparently 
never thought of propagating his religion by force. He now 

began, as he stoutly declared, to receive revelations 
to^Force. ^^^^ ^^^> justifying war in general and war on 

Mecca in particular. "If God did not permit his 
people to fight, their enemies would destroy monasteries, 
churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which God's name is 
proclaimed. Permission to fight is given to those who fight 
because they have been unjustly treated and to those who 
have been driven from their home simply because they said 
'Allah is our God'; Allah is able to help all such" (surah 
22:40-41). Like many another, Mohammed identified God's 
cause with his own and discovered a way of satisfying his 
feelings of revenge while making it appear that it was God's 
will that the Meccans should be destroyed. ''Fight for Allah's 
cause against those who fight you; kill them wherever you 
find them and drive them from the place from which they 
have driven you (Mecca); it is worse to tolerate their ofifense 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 259 

(idolatry) than to kill them; do not fight them near the conse- 
crated temple of God (the Caaba) unless they first attack you 
there; but if they attack you there, kill them, for that is the 
reward of those who do not believe; make war on them till 
there is no more offense and all men worship Allah alone" 
(surah 2 : 186-189). 

The changes in Mohammed during the first two years after 
the flight were undoubtedly for the worse, for they led him 
into a course of ever-increasing deception and violence. Out 
of pique and shrewd calculation he had changed 
Retrogres- from Jerusalem to the Caaba; he had justified this 
Mohi^ed. change by forgeries about Abraham; yielding to 
the desire for revenge, he pretended to receive revela- 
tions from God at first justifying war in general, and then com- 
manding war to be waged on the Meccans. From a war of 
vengeance to one of conquest was but an easy step, and Mo- 
hammed, once a man of peace and a preacher of righteousness, 
was now rapidly becoming a man of war and violence. As 
this change in him proceeded, his interests and activities 
were revolutionized. He began to receive revelations which 
bear every evidence of having been made to order; they ac- 
corded so perfectly with his desires and were so opportune that 
we are forced to believe that he fraudulently used the form of 
revelation in order to forestall criticism and opposition. When 
he did anything that gave offense to his followers, he promptly 
received a revelation in justification of what he had done. 
With these ex post facto revelations he was able to silence all 
except a few persistent critics, and these he put to death. He 
no longer occupied himself exclusively with the high moral and 
religious ideas, with zeal for which he had been consumed 
during the earliest years of his mission, but busied himself with 
political intrigues, marauding excursions, wars, and the acquisi- 
tion of temporal power. Mohammed was no longer an en- 
thusiastic religious reformer, nor the founder of a new religion; 
he was rather the unscrupulous maker of a state, ready to com- 
mit any act of violence or injustice that promised to advance 
his power. 



26o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

As soon as Mohammed had safely estabhshed his people at 
Medina he began to seek an opportunity to take vengeance on 
the Meccans. With his men he scoured the country in all 

directions, hoping to catch some Meccan caravan 
Meccans. ^ ^^ ^ disadvantage and plunder it. But the Meccans 

took such precautions that he found no favorable 
opportunity to fall upon them. Finally he determined to take 
advantage of the holy month to attack them, because at such 
a time they would not be on their guard. A handful of his 
men, having been ordered to make the treacherous onset, suc- 
ceeded beyond expectation. They killed one Meccan, took 
some prisoners and a large amount of booty, and returned in 
safety to Medina. In support of this sacrilegious act Mo- 
hammed received a timely revelation. "They ask thee about 
fighting in the holy month; say: 'Fighting in the holy month 
is bad, but declension from the way of God, and unbelief, and 
the expulsion of his people from the holy temple at Mecca are 
worse; and to give offense (by idolatry) is worse.' And be- 
sides, they would not cease from fighting you until they had 
deprived you of your religion" (surah 2: 214). 

A few weeks later Mohammed achieved a notable victory 
at the village of Badr. While lying in wait for a caravan he 
fell in with the Meccans, who were anxious to avenge their 

recent injury. With only about 300 men he took 
Badrf 624. ^^ advantageous position on a hill and awaited the 

attack of the enemy, who numbered about 1,000. 
The superior numbers of the Meccans gave them no advan- 
tage, because they fought after the ancient Arabic manner, 
a few of them going out at a time to meet an equal number 

^, ^ ^ of the enemy in single combat. Mohammed, on the 

C/. I Sam. 17. . . . 

other hand, introduced a tactical change which was 

of the greatest consequence. He drew his forces up in a com- 
pact body and forbade them to leave their places without his 
consent. This, he said, was God's way of fighting. "God 
loves those who fight in his way in compact ranks " (surah 61:4). 
The Mohammedans slew about seventy Meccans, took forty- 
three prisoners and much booty, consisting of camels, horses, 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 261 

and weapons. After the Meccans had paid a heavy ransom 
for the prisoners, Mohammed made the final disposition of the 
spoil. One-fifth of it he took for ''God and his 
the^Booty. prophet and his family, for orphans, the poor, and 
travellers," some of it he gave as special rewards to 
those who had distinguished themselves for bravery, and all 
the rest of it he distributed equally among those who had taken 
part in the battle. This plan of division, which appealed so 
powerfully to the cupidity of the Arabs, was a masterly stroke 
of shrewdness on his part. His followers were affected by it 
as a lion's cub by the first taste of blood; to their zeal for the 
spread of their faith was added a still more powerful incentive, 
the desire of spoils. Neighboring tribes, which had hesitated 
to join him, were chagrined that they had missed a golden 
opportunity, and thereafter were eager to assist him in his 
marauding expeditions. 

For about a year after the battle of Badr Mohammed was 
successful in his raids, which were directed chiefly against 
prosperous Jewish colonies to the north of Medina. Unpre- 
pared for attack, they were easily conquered, and 
Se Jews. Mohammed enriched his people with ill-gotten 
wealth. Consequently his prestige grew and many 
Arabs, eager to share the prosperity of his followers, accepted 
his faith. He met, however, with one serious defeat. In 
Battle o£ ^ battle with the Meccans at Mt. Uhud, in 625, he 
Uhud, 625. -^as struck with a stone and almost killed, and his 
Siege of troops put to flight. In 627 the Meccans, with an 

^' ^^' army of about 10,000 men, laid siege to Medina, but 
were unable to take it. Their failure was equivalent to a vic- 
tory for Mohammed, and his power continued to grow. The 
next year (628) he took steps to encourage the formation of a 
body of cavalry. In distributing the booty after a successful 
raid, he gave to each of the mounted men three times as much 
as to the foot-soldiers. The effect was magical; aU strove 
to equip themselves with horses and Mohammed was soon in 
possession of a magnificent body of cavalry. 
In 630 Mohanmied felt strong enough to attack Mecca, and 



262 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

marched against it with a large force. He met with Uttle 
resistance, however, for many of the inhabitants of Mecca were 
wiUing to submit to him, now that he was successful, 
M^ecca, 630. ^^^ ^o accept his religion since it promised to en- 
rich them. After the city surrendered to him he 
treated its inhabitants with surprising leniency, and endeavored 
to win their friendship and support by an exhibition of noble 
traits of character. His revenge spent itself in the execution 
of about a dozen persons, most of whom were his bitter per- 
sonal enemies. He took possession of the Caaba and dedicated 
it wholly to the worship of Allah. 

In the conquest of Mecca Mohammed attained the goal for 
which he had labored for eight years. Then, during the next 
two years, which were also his last, he developed his political 
ideas and created the form of government which 
of^the^state" characterized the Mohammedans for centuries. 
Faithful to his early belief that Jews and Chris- 
tians worshipped the true God, he did not insist on their con- 
version, but he demanded of them political submission and the 
annual payment of a hea\y poll tax. Toward the heathen, 
however, his attitude was entirely different; he gave them the 
choice between conversion and the sword. All Mohammedans 
were bound to pay a part of their income (generally a tenth) as 
alms, or a sin offering. "Take alms of their possessions, through 
which thou purifiest them and coverest their sins" (surah 
9:104). Mohammed created a kind of central government 
(i) by acting as supreme judge in all litigation, (2) by levying a 
tax on all, and (3) by appointing a governor (emir) and tax-col- 
lectors for every tribe that had submitted to him. At his 
death (632) he w^as the acknowledged lord of Arabia, and 
was still sending out his troops to extend his power by further 
conquests. 

Such is the simple story of Mohammed's life. He had, how- 
ever, produced a book which was to exercise a remarkable in- 
fluence over the millions of his followers. His religion is pre- 
eminently the religion of a book, and to this we must now 
give our attention. For some time before Mohammed began 




X 

ARx\BIA 

Note to Map X. — This map shows (i) Arabia and the adjacent coun- 
tries, and (2) the chief cities connected with the rehgion or government 
of the Mohammedans. After 622 Mohammed lived at Medina, although 
Mecca became the seat of his religion. From 655 to 750 Damascus was 
the residence of the caliphs and the seat of the Mohammedan govern- 
ment. In 750 the caliphs removed to Bagdad. In the tenth century a 
rival caliphate was established in Egypt, the caliph of which had his resi- 
dence at Cairo. A third independent caliphate was established in Spain 
^^^th its capital at Cordova. 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 263 

to receive revelations he is said to have been afflicted with a 
strange kind of nervous attack, which resembled epilepsy; he 

fell to the ground and became almost unconscious; 
Suffered he Uttered inarticulate sounds; -his eyes were fixed 

voiS\uacks ^^ ^ stony stare; and he heard a confused sound 

as of voices. At first he was alarmed because 
he feared that these attacks were the evidence of demoniacal 
possession, but in time he became convinced that they were 
caused by Allah, who was speaking to him in this way. He 
soon became able to tell what Allah had said to him while he 
was in this ecstatic state.* This interpretation of Mohammed's 
attacks is strikingly confirmed by the earliest surahs (chapters) 
of the Koran. They are merely broken ejaculations and ex- 
clamations, obscure in meaning, and they give evidence of 
having been uttered under the strongest nervous and religious 
excitement. After a while Mohammed became calmer, these 
nervous attacks seem to have ceased, and his revelations as- 
sumed a different character; they became clearer and show 
evidence of deliberation and calculation. 

* Without attempting to explain the attacks from which Mohammed 
suffered, it is instructive to compare them with the mysterious phe- 
nomena which are produced under strong religious excitement, and which 
accompany the utterance of prophecy, especially among people on a 
low plane of civilization. A classic example of prophecy while in an 
ecstatic state, as this half-conscious state is called, is furnished by the 
account of Balaam, who three times tried in vain to curse Israe', Each 
time he lost power over himself, fell to the ground in a trance-like con- 
dition, and uttered a blessing instead of a curse (Num. 24: 4.ff.). Ap- 
parently akin to this was the "speaking with tongues," which accom- 
panied St. Paul's preaching in Corinth (I Cor. 14:2^.) and which 
was successfully reproduced for a while by the Irvingites in London in 
the early part of the nineteenth century. It is neither frivolous nor 
far-fetched in this connection to mention, for the sake of comparison, 
the extreme cases of nervous attack which often accompany great re- 
ligious revivals, especially among negroes. Of the many interesting 
examples that might be cited from the heathen world, that of the 
Pythia, the prophetess of the god Apollo, at Delphi in Greece, is in- 
structive. When any one came to Delphi to consult the god, a kind of 
incense was burned about his prophetess, and, as she inhaled the smoke 
of it, she either assumed a frenzy or actually became frenzied, and what- 
ever she said while in this ecstatic state was regarded as the answer of 
the god to the question that had been propounded to him. 



264 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The Koran consists of these revelations, which are generally 
cast in the form of a dialogue between Allah and Mohammed. 
It is probable that Mohammed ceased to fall into the ecstatic 
state during his later years, although he retained 
the form of the dialogue and did not hesitate to 
^•' ^|- put into the mouth of Allah his own ideas and de- 

sires. Even if he had been conscious of fraud in 
this procedure he would no doubt have justified it on the ground 
that he was sure of the truth of what he said, and that the end 
justified the means. It is a strong man indeed, who, believing 
that he has the truth, does not feel justified in lying for it and 
in using force to insure its success. Whether in this Mohammed 
consciously practised deception or was only self-deceived may 
be left to the psychologist or to the casuist. 

The Koran has to a considerable extent an esoteric character; 
that is, it was intended primarily for those who already believed ; 
it was meant for the instruction, direction, and comfort of Mo- 
hammed and his followers. To convince others, Mohammed 
preached, argued, and talked, quoting the Koran whenever it 
served his purpose. Neither his sermons nor his conversations 
were put into the Koran ; it contains only his revelations. Some 
of these were written at the time they were revealed, while 
others were committed to memory by his followers. Although 
cherished as the word of God, they were not at once put together 
in an orderly way to form a book. So long as Mohammed lived 
the necessity of collecting his revelations in book form was not 
felt, because he could always be appealed to, and besides he 
more than once changed them to suit a new situation. But 
after his death there was nothing but the Koran to take his 
place. Accordingly, every effort was made to collect all the 
koranic utterances, and they were arranged in surahs or chap- 
ters without any regard to their chronological order. When 
these surahs are rearranged in their chronological order — a 
very difficult task — they enable us to follow Mohammed in his 
development and to trace the growth in his ideas. Mohamme- 
dans regard the Koran with idolatrous reverence. Blind to the 
numerous inconsistencies it contains, they see in it the final 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 265 

and highest authority in all matters, religious as well as 
secular. 

Mohammed, as has been said, derived most of his doctrines 
from the Jews, but added enough to them to cause us to re- 
spect his ability. He had a high conception of the unity of 
God, and, at the first, felt religious truth in a direct 
OriginaSy. ^ ^^Y- His Originality consisted not so much in new 
ideas as in the directness, vigor, and certainty of 
his religious perceptions. The idea of the unity of God was not 
new; two great religions had already been established on that 
as their basis. In the intensity of Mohammed's feeling, how- 
ever, it became a new doctrine, filled with a quickening power 
sufficient to produce a great religious movement and to establish 
a third world religion on a monotheistic basis. 

In apparent imitation of the decalogue of the Jews Mo- 
hammed made a summary of his teachings in the following 
twelve commandments: 

jj. ry , '*(i) Have no other God besides Allah, that 

Command- thou mayst not be condemned and sit helpless. 

lucnts 

(2) Thy Lord has commanded thee to serve him 
alone. (3) Show kindness to thy parents whether one or both 
of them attain old age in thy house. ... (4) Give thy kins- 
man his due, and the beggar, and the traveller, but not waste- 
fully; for those that waste their possessions are brothers of 
the devil. . . . God gives daily bread to whom He will, and 
provides; for He knows his servants. (5) Do not kill your 
children out of fear that you will be brought to want; for we 
provide for them and for you. For to slay them is a great 
sin. (6) Draw not near unto fornication, for it is wickedness, 
and evil is the way thereof. (7) Kill not, except for just cause. 
(8) Touch not the possessions of orphans, except to improve 
them, imtil he becomes of age. (9) Keep your contract with 
Allah, for an accoimt of it wiU be demanded. (10) Give full 
measure when you measure, and weigh with a true balance. . . . 

(11) Pursue [i. e., repeat] nothing unless you know it to be 
true; for you must give an account of your eye, ear, and heart. 

(12) Walk not proudly on the earth, for you can neither 



266 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

split the earth nor equal the mountains in size" (surah 
17:23-40). 

Mohammed has been aptly compared to King David, in 
whom vindictiveness, cruelty, lust, and deceit were found 
side by side with the noblest qualities. Nothing can be said 
Character of derogatory to his character up to the time of his 
Mohammed, ^-^j^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ j^^ yielded to the ignoble desire 

His Vices. for revenge and to the corroding ambition for po- 
litical power; and these, cloaked under a burning zeal for God's 
cause, corrupted the sources of his life. From the time he 
yielded to them there began a moral and religious retrogres- 
sion in him, which increased to the day of his death. He be- 
came so impatient of all opposition that he was occasionally 
guilty of foul murder in order to rid himself of troublesome 
critics. He was guilty of wanton cruelty and murderous cu- 
pidity in attacking the Jews and seizing their property. At 
first a model in conduct to his followers, in the later years of 
his life he strove to exempt himself from all moral restrictions, 
and to create for himself a position in which, free from all re- 
straints, he should be governed only by his desires. When 
an old man he fell under the dominion of lust, and, although he 
had limited his followers to four wives, he pretended to receive 
revelations from Allah ordering him to take as many wives and 
concubines as he wished — a command which he was not slow 
to obey. With consummate treachery he broke his oaths and 
alliances whenever it promised to be to his advantage. Under 
the opposition and persecution with which he met in Mecca the 
noblest traits of his character had developed, but in the free- 
dom of Medina these began to fade and the vicious elements 
in his character won the upper hand. Mohammed no longer 
strove to be the moral pattern for his followers, or to exemplify 
his doctrines with his life. 

Yet, if we study Mohammed in a comparative way from 
the point of view of his age and of his people and surroundings, 
we find that he possessed qualities and virtues which command 
our respect and admiration. Even in the days of his greatest 
success he remained simple in his tastes and in the manner 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 267 

of his life; refusing the service of slaves, he mended his own 
clothes and attended to his own wants. He was free from 
luxury in food and in his surroundings. He was 
His Virtues, true in his friendships and deeply grateful for any 
kindness shown him. He was not haughty, but 
associated freely with men of every rank. Although he put 
to death a few who opposed him and refused to believe in him, 
yet, for an Arab of the seventh century, he was remarkably 
mild and conciliatory. He showed considerable moderation 
in the manner in which he exercised his absolute power. In 
many respects he compares favorably with rulers who be- 
longed to a superior race and who were on a much higher plane 
of civilization. Whatever his faults and vices, he will always 
hold a unique place in history. For he began his remarkable 
career as a camel-driver and ended it as the founder of a great 
religion and the autocratic head of a vigorous state, with powers 
as great as those of pope and emperor combined. 

Mohammedanism was from the first a missionary religion: 
that is, Mohammed made it the sacred duty of believers to 
labor for the spread of the faith and the conversion of unbe- 
lievers. In regard to the means of propagating 
ReUgion."^'^ the faith the Koran is inconsistent. During his 
early years Mohammed declared over and over 
again that there should be no compulsion in religion; that his 
whole duty consisted in persuasion and preaching; that the 
acceptance of his faith was left to the free choice of each in- 
dividual. On the other hand, he later gave ex- 
Force. . . . 

plicit commands to use force to compel its accep- 
tance. Yet he certainly excepted Jews and Christians, and 
Mohammedans have generally followed the principle laid down 
by him in that they have forced their religion only upon heathen 
peoples, permitting Jews and Christians to retain their faith. 
But it must not be supposed that Mohammedanism has been 
^ . spread only by the sword. It has been, and still 

Persuasion. . '' "^ ... r i • 

is, spread by an army of missionaries, who, for their 
zeal and devotion to their work, for their fiery eloquence and 
power of persuasive preaching, for their perseverance in the 



268 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

face of apparently insurmountable obstacles, for their endur- 
ance of persecution, and for their heroic martyrdoms, are 
worthy to be set side by side with the great martyr missionaries 
of Christianity. 

Mohammed's death accelerated rather than checked the 
spread of his religion. Like a whirlwind his armies overran 
Palestine, Syria, Persia, and Egypt. And this was but the 
S read of beginning. Within a hundred years after his 
Mohamme- death Armenia had been subjugated; the peoples 
of central Asia as far as the frontier of China had 
been conquered and converted; India had been invaded and 
the Punjaub occupied; and Asia Minor had been invaded. 
Then for years Mohammedan armies tried to force their way 
into eastern Europe, they took some of the Greek islands and 
attacked Constantinople, but were beaten off after memorable 
sieges (672 and 717). \/In Africa they were not less successful 
than in the east. By the year 711 they had taken North Africa 
and passed over into Spain. There they quickly put an end 
to the kingdom of the west Goths, and then crossed the Pyre- 
nees and attacked the Franks. But here, after some successes, 
their power was broken in battle near Poitiers (732) by the forces 
of Charles Martel, and shortly thereafter they were compelled 
to withdraw beyond the Pyrenees. They took kindly to the 
sea and became intrepid seamen. They attacked the islands 
of the Mediterranean, and gradually conquered them (Sicily, 
827-860). They invaded Italy and overran the southern 
part of it even to the gates of Rome. For some years it seemed 
that they would be able to establish a great Mohammedan 
state there. Although this danger passed away, they con- 
tinued to hold various places till far into the eleventh century, 
when the Normans drove them out and took possession of both 
the mainland and Sicily. 

Various factors had contributed to make the Mohammedan 
armies invincible. Mohammed's message concerning the one 
true God had acted as a life-bringing truth and had welded 
the scattered and contentious Arab tribes into a nation. A 
fierce national pride was the first product of their new national 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 269 

life. And this pride, together with their zeal for the spread of 
their faith and their desire for booty, both of which amounted 
Factors in ^^ ^ passion with them, gave them an impetuous 
the Success courage which swept everything before it. But 

of the Armies. , . . .1,1 

other things must be taken mto account too. 
Devastating wars and excessive taxation had destroyed the 
resisting power of the whole civilized world. Rome and Persia 
had been engaged for centuries in long and bloody wars, which 
had left both empires exhausted. Heavy taxation had op- 
pressed and impoverished them. Moreover, many of the 
inhabitants of the empire in western Asia and Egypt, being 
heretical, were deeply disaffected because the government at 
Constantinople annoyed and persecuted them for religion's 
sake. Consequently they were glad to change their political 
masters, because they had greater religious liberty under a 
Mohammedan government than under the rule of orthodox 
emperors. But, after all, the real cause of their success is to 
be found in the fact that the genius of Mohammed had power- 
fully wrought upon them, revolutionized their minds, and 
started in them a tremendous impulse to achievement. And 
in this we have one measure of the personality of Mohammed. 

Mohammed died in 632 without having made any provision 
for the government, either of his state or of his religion. Many 
of his followers thought that a prophet should be succeeded 
M hammed's ^^ ^ prophet, and in fact several prophets appeared 
Caliphs or ^^ immediately and sought recognition as his suc- 
cessor. Others thought that the ofi&ce should be 
hereditary in the family of Mohammed and proposed that his 
son-in-law, Ali, should succeed him. Even before Mohammed's 
death there were two powerful factions intriguing to gain in- 
fluence in the direction of affairs; one consisted of those who 
had fled with Mohammed from Mecca, and who regarded them- 
selves as a kind of aristocracy of the faith; the other was com- 
posed of more recent converts, especially of the Meccans. The 
unexpected death of Mohammed and the presence of factions 
and conflicting opinions prevented the proper consideration of 
what should be done and led to hasty action. A few of the 



270 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

more intimate companions of Mohammed, members of the fac- 
tion first named, met and hastily elected Abu Bekr as his caliph 
or successor. This choice caused great dissatisfaction, and 
there were many uprisings and rebellions in various parts of 
Arabia. But Abu Bekr vigorously suppressed them and es- 
tablished his authority over all Arabia. 

The rule of the first four caliphs (Abu Bekr 632-634, Omar 
634-644, Othman 644-655, and Ali 655-661) is called the 
period of the undivided caliphate, although under Othman 
and Ali, both of whom were murdered, there were 
vided Cali- many rebellions and much civil strife. The high 
6^2-661 offices in both state and army had powerful attrac- 

tions which awakened the ambitions of many, 
phateof Consequently it is not strange that rival caliphs 

66^^750"^' arose, one in Damascus, the other in Arabia, 661. 
After devastating wars the caliph at Damascus was 
victorious, and the office of caliph became hereditary in his 
family. He and his descendants are known as the Ommeiades. 
In spite of numerous rebellions and plots against them they 
reigned in Damascus to 750, when the Abbassides, the descen- 
dants of Abbas, an uncle of Mohammed, rebelled against them. 
Of Bagdad, destroyed them, seized the caliphate, and removed 
750-1258. j^g sg^i- ^Q Bagdad. 

The caliphate of Bagdad reached its height about 800 under 
the famous caliph, Haroun-al-Raschid, and began to decline 
soon afterward. Its political dismemberment was caused by 
Ed f C U ^^^ emirs or governors of the provinces, who made 
phate of themselves independent of the caliph and ruled vir- 

tually as kings. In the eleventh century Turks from 
central Asia, who were still half barbarous, overran all western 
Asia. In 1058 the caliph invited their chief, Togrul Beg, to 
Bagdad and resigned into his hand all temporal authority and 
made him sultan of the Mohammedan world. The caliph re- 
tained only religious authority, but even this was merely nom- 
inal. This changed caliphate continued till 1258, when the son 
of the great conqueror, Ghengis Khan, put to death the last 
caliph. 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 271 

Besides that of Bagdad two other caliphates deserving a 
word were established, one in Spain, the other in Egypt. When 
the Ommeiades were destroyed (750) only one of them, Abd- 
er-Rahman, escaped. After long wanderings he 
Cordova.^ '^ finally reached Spain, where the Mohammedans 
acknowledged him as ruler (755). He and his de- 
scendants were called emirs, sultans, or sons of the caliphs. 
Although their territory was called the caliphate of Cordova 
it was not till 929 that Abd-er-Rahman III assumed the title 
of caliph. This caliphate was weakened by constant wars 
with the Christians and by internal rebellions. About 103 1 
the caHph was deposed, and the caliphate of Cordova soon dis- 
solved inio several independent states (Toledo, Seville, Cordova, 
etc.). By 1300 the Christians had conquered all of these 
except the little principality of Granada, which remained in 
the hands of Mohammedans to 1492. 

Early in the tenth century a clever impostor, claiming to be 
a descendant of Fatima, a daughter of Mohammed, acquired 
considerable authority in Africa. He and his descendants, 
Call hate of ^^^^^ ^^^ Fatimites, got possession of Egypt, 
Cairo, and in 969 founded Cairo and made it the seat of 

their government. Their caliphate consisted of a 
large part of northern Africa and Sicily, and for a while they 
held Jerusalem and Syria. Their power began to wane in the 
eleventh century, when the Normans wrested Sicily from them 
( 1 060-1 080). The decline of their power was hastened by re- 
volts.! In 1 1 71 Saladin, who ruled western Asia (1169-1193), 
conquered their caliph, put an end to their caliphate, and took 
possession of their territory. 

Islam is divided over speculative theological questions into 
as many sects as is Christianity. Inconsistent statements in 
the Koran have given rise to various interpretations, which 
Many Mo- ^^^^ ^^^^ accentuated and perpetuated by the 
hammedan formation of sccts. A fierce theological battle 

Sects 

was waged among their teachers over the formula- 
tion of the doctrines concerning God and his attributes. The 
•question of foreordination and free will split the Mohammedan 



272 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

world into two great hostile camps. There was no mysticism 
in Mohammed's religion, yet Islam has produced schools of 
mystics quite as remarkable as those connected with Chris- 
tianity. Neither was Mohammed ascetic nor is there anything 
in the Koran in favor of celibacy or monasticism, yet within 
Islam there has been developed an ascetic monastic movement 
of large proportions. 

If for no other reason, Mohammed should awaken a sym- 
pathetic interest because of the marvellously stimulating effect 
of his personality on his followers; for it must be attributed 

Mohamme- ^° ^^^ ^^^^ ^^ many peoples, among them half- 
dan Civiliza- barbarous tribes, were suddenly welded together 
into a great and ambitious nation, and that during 
the first three or four centuries after his death they produced 
a civilization which was far in advance of that of Europe at 
the same time. The elements of this civilization they derived 
from Greece, Persia, and India, but they modified them and 
improved them, and the resulting civilization they spread from 
Spain far into central Asia. This civilization reached its height 
about 800 and rapidly declined in all those lands which came im- 
der the domination of the Turks. The Mohammedans* excelled 
in agriculture and horticulture, and practised them in a scientific 
way. They delighted in landscape-gardening, and, by grafting, 
produced new kinds of flowers and fruits. They knew the 
value of fertilizers and irrigation, by means of which they made 
the mountainous and rainless regions of their empire into gar- 
dens of delight. In manufactures and in the industrial arts 
they surpassed the world in perfection of workmanship and in 
the variety and beauty of design. They worked in metals — 
gold, silver, copper, bronze, iron, and steel. In the production 
of textile fabrics they have never been surpassed. They made 
glass and pottery and knew the secrets of dyeing. They ex- 
celled in dressing leather, as the terms "cordovan" and "mo- 
rocco" testify. In order to prevent idolatry, Mohammed for- 

* Saracen, originally the name of some nomadic Arabic tribes, came 
to be applied to all Mohammedans, The Mohammedans of North 
Africa and of Spain are commonly called Moors. 



MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM 273 

bade his people to make the likeness of man or beast in stone or 
in color. Consequently they have never excelled in sculpture 
or in painting. In architecture, however, they developed a 
beautiful style, which was characterized by the round and 
horseshoe arch, by the dome, by the tall and graceful minaret, 
and by richness of ornamentation, especially of their interiors. 
Their buildings were comparatively simple in construction, but 
marvels of perfection and of richness in detail and decoration. 
Their architectural remains, consisting chiefly of mosques and 
palaces, are still the wonder and admiration of the world. 

Their commerce attained vast proportions, extending from 

Spain to China, and from Scandinavia to the interior of Africa. 

They were the middlemen between Europe and the east. 

Some of their fairs or markets were famous. Their 

Commerce. . , . 

commerce, mdustries, and manufactures made them 
rich, and wealth enabled them to indulge in luxuries and to 
procure everything that would gratify their senses. The Ara- 
bian Nights, although perhaps not an exact picture of actual 
conditions among them, at least portrays their mind and ideals. 
Although luxury-loving and sensual, they cultivated also the 
mind. Much of their learning was expended on the Koran. 
Numberless commentaries on it were written, and from it they 
derived their theology, law, ethics, and, nominally, their phi- 
losophy. In fact, however, they drew their philosophy from the 
Greek philosophers, chiefly Aristotle. Through them and their 
translations mediaeval Europe obtained its first knowledge of 
Aristotle. They learned medicine and surgery from the Greeks 
(Galen, Hippocrates), but added materially to the stock of 
medical knowledge thus obtained. Chemistry they pursued 
rather as alchemy, in search of the secret of eternal youth 
(elixir of life) and of the philosopher's stone, which was supposed 
to have the power of changing base metals into gold. While 
doing so, however, they discovered new elements and produced 
new and valuable compounds, such as potash, alcohol, corrosive 
sublimate, nitrate of silver, and nitric and sulphuric acids. 

They excelled in mathematics. In the twelfth century an 
Arab mathematician invented the zero, which is of fundamental 



274 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

importance because it created the decimal system by giving to 
the nine digits the value of position. Algebra is their crea- 
,, , tion. About 820 an Arab composed a treatise on 

Mathematics. . / 

algebra which contamed equations of the second 
degree. It was later introduced into Europe, where it served 
as the text-book on that subject down to the sixteenth century. 
They developed spherical trigonometry. They made con- 
siderable progress in physics and in astronomy, and constructed 
various astronomical instruments; they calculated the angle 
of the ecliptic and the precession of the equinoxes. They 
were acquainted with the Ptolemaic system of astronomy, 
knew the shape of the earth, and taught geography by the use 
of globes. Much of their learning was carried into Europe in 
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and hastened there the 
general awakening which is called the Renaissance. 



CHAPTER XV 
THE CRUSADES 

The most picturesque and romantic movement of the Middle 
Age was the crusades, which had for one of their objects the 
reconquest of the land hallowed by the life and death of Jesus. 

To understand the origin of this movement we 
Land." ° must foUow the growth of the passionate affection 
CfR i^o which the people of the west had come to feel for 

the Holy Land, and particularly for Jerusalem. 
The emperor Hadrian (i 18-138) destroyed the city, and for 
about two hundred years it was a small town of no importance. 
Jews were forbidden to enter it, and Christians had not yet 
begun to show it special honor. The eyes of the world were 
again directed toward it in 326, when Helena, the mother of 
the emperor Constantine, made her famous pilgrimage to it. 
Her example found imitators in ever-increasing numbers, and 
the idea prevailed more and more that without visiting the 
places hallowed by the presence of Jesus while on earth no one 
could attain the highest degree of holiness; prayer in those 
places was regarded as more effectual, and God's grace was 
thought to be more easily and richly obtained there than 
elsewhere. So century by century the number of pilgrims to 
Jerusalem grew larger. Occasional protests against the cus- 
tom, and against the belief on which it was based were made. 
"The way to heaven is neither longer nor more difficult from 
Britain than from Jerusalem, for the kingdom of God is within 
you," said St. Jerome; but his words were contradicted by his 
example, for he spent the last thirty-four years of his life as a 
monk in Bethlehem, attracted thither by the cradle of Christ. 
The Mohammedan conquest of Palestine scarcely affected its 
Christian population, nor did it interfere with the custom of 
making pilgrimages to the holy places, nor diminish the num- 

27s 



276 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ber of pilgrims. The Mohammedans left the Christians in un- 
disturbed possession of their churches, with few exceptions, 
and permitted them to exercise their religion freely. Christian 
pilgrims came and went without molestation. Up to the elev- 
enth century Christians suffered so little inconvenience from 
the Mohammedan occupation of Palestine that no one thought 
of making war to recover the holy places. 

The advent of the Seljuk Turks, a people from central Asia, 
in the eleventh century changed this. Although they were 
Mohammedans, their coming was almost as disastrous to the 

Mohammedan population of the country as to 
Palestine! ^ ^^^ Christian. Being half-barbarous and fiercely 

fanatical, they had no appreciation of the civiliza- 
tion of the one, nor regard for the religion of the other. Under 
the weight of their barbarism the arts and industries languished, 
learning deteriorated, and the whole civilization retrograded. 
They were fanatically attached to the letter of the Koran and 
had, therefore, a low, formal type of Mohammedanism which 
accorded with their ignorance. They destroyed the liberal 
type of Mohammedanism which had prevailed for some three 
hundred years. During the last half of the eleventh century 
they overran much of Asia Minor and Syria and got possession 
of nearly all the cities, which they garrisoned without destroy- 
ing the Christian population. After they took Jerusalem (1071) 
Christians had no peace there. The Turks defiled the churches 
and holy places, and oppressed the Christians in order to com- 
pel them to seek protection by accepting Mohammedanism. 
They were especially violent toward pilgrims; some they beat 
and robbed, some they killed, and others they seized and sold 
into slavery. Returning pilgrims recited these horrors as they 
passed through Europe, everywhere throughout the west exciting 
a strong desire to take vengeance on the infidels. 

The Turks advanced also into Asia Minor and the Greek 
emperor was unable to prevent them from conquering al- 
most all his Asiatic provinces. For under a series of weak 
rulers the empire had been brought low, and owing to the pecu- 
lation of officials, the army and navy were in a wretched con- 



THE CRUSADES 277 

dition and quite unable to offer effective resistance to a deter- 
mined enemy. The treasury was empty and the people bur- 
Attack the dened with taxes. When Alexius I (1081-1 118) came 
Greek to the throne he found the empire threatened on all 

sides; the Turks were on the opposite shore of the 
Bosporus, seeking to attack Constantinople; other barbarous 
peoples were crossing the Danube and laying waste the empire 
to the very gates of Constantinople; and the Normans from 
southern Italy were landing on the Adriatic coast and making 
a bold and determined effort to conquer the whole Balkan 
peninsula (1081-1085). Alexius was a man of no mean ability. 
With the most heroic efforts he drove the Normans out of the 
empire and overwhelmed the barbarians on the Danube frontier; 
but, worn out by these labors, he was powerless to drive back 
the Turks. In his extremity he appealed to the pope for help 
(winter 1094-1095). 

This was not the first appeal of the sort, for ever since the 

appearance of the Turks in Asia Minor the successive emperors 

had appealed, though in vain, to the pope for aid. Gregory VII 

(1073-1080 had indeed undertaken to raise an 

Alexius Ap- r / r ^ i r -, ' 

peals to the army for the succor of the emperor, but, after brmg- 
Hefp. ^^ ^^g together about 50,000 men for that purpose, 
„ ^ „ was unable to lead or send them to the east. Alexius 

S. B., 278. 

had already made frequent appeals to the pope, 
who, owing to his struggle with the western emperor, was un- 
able to send troops to his relief. Alexius had, however, made 
Urban II (1088-1099) his friend, and in spite of the schism be- 
tween the Greek and Latin churches. Urban had given him 
absolution and treated him as a faithful and orthodox son of 
the church. The political situation was favorable, for the 
emperor, Henry IV, had been compelled to withdraw to Ger- 
many, leaving the pope undisputed master in Italy. Urban II, 
in order to secure the fruits of his victory, was making a grand 
tour which should take him through northern Italy and even 
beyond the Alps into France. The messengers of Alexius came 
to him at Piacenza, where he held a council which was numer- 
ously attended (4,000 clergymen and 30,000 laymen). Urban 



278 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

made an urgent and successful appeal to the assembled multi- 
tude, and the messengers of Alexius were able to return to Con- 
stantinople with the encouraging report that the pope had in- 
terested himself in the matter and that thousands in the west 
had promised to come to his aid. 

Urban II continued his journey to France and held a great 
council at Clermont (November 18-28, 1095) which was at- 
tended by 14 archbishops, 250 bishops, 400 abbots, and thou- 
Urban II at sands of priests and laymen. In a public square 

Clermont of the city on the 27 th of November, Urban ad- 
Asked Help , , / , . t . 1 ,1.1 
for the Greeks dressed the multitudes, renewing the appeal which 

Pkces.^ °^ he had made at Piacenza, and somewhat widening 

e ^ o its scope. Beginning with a statement of the de- 

S. B., 279, 280. 1- o o 

o., 282. feats and losses of the Greeks, and of their suffer- 

ings at the hands of the Turks, he described the 
unhappy condition of the Christians in Asia Minor, Syria, and 
Palestine, who were under Mohammedan rule, and aroused his 
hearers by a harrowing account of the atrocities inflicted upon 
them by the Turks. He then urged all who were present to 
go to the aid of the Greeks and to " destroy that vile race from 
the land of our friends." As if he had not already said enough 
to stir his hearers to action he continued: "You should be 
moved especially by the holy grave of our Lord and Saviour, 
which is now held by unclean peoples, and by the holy places 
which are treated with dishonor and irreverently befouled with 
their uncleanness." From a simple relief expedition in aid of 
the Greek emperor, such as Urban had announced at Piacenza, 
he had enlarged it to a united effort on the part of all Christians 
to destroy the Turks and to recover the holy places. Al- 
though Urban still put the emphasis on the aid 
Thfnk^Most- which was to be given the Greeks, his hearers, who 
Ho°y Haces ^^^ ^^ Special interest in the Greek empire, thought 
principally of recovering the holy places to which 
they were deeply attached. And so the movement, in its very 
inception, was partially turned from what in the mind of Urban 
had been its original purpose. 
As further inducements Urban offered large spiritual rewards, 



THE CRUSADES 279 

announcing that "all who die by the way, whether by land or 
by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate 
Spiritual In- remission of sins." And in the council he enacted 
ducements. that "if any one out of devotion alone, and not for 
S.B., 179, 281. honor or gain, sets out for Jerusalem to free the 
., 274 277. ^.j^^j-(,]^ Qf God, the journey shall be regarded as the 
equivalent of all penance." Such action was not an innova- 
tion, for in the ninth century two popes had promised forgive- 
ness of sins to all who should die in battle with Mohammedans, 
probably because such a death was regarded as akin to martyr- 
dom.* 
The effect of Urban's speech at Clermont was far greater 

* Urban's successors went much further and offered other advantages 
of a secular character. In 1145 Eugene III enlarged on the promise 
of Urban as follows: 

"Wishing, therefore, to provide for your welfare as well as to relieve 
the church in the east, we grant to those who, in a spirit of devotion, 
shall determine to accomplish this holy and necessary work, by the 
- authority of God conferred on us, the same remission of 

R 131 ^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ predecessor, Pope Urban, granted. And we 
decree that their wives and children, their goods and 
possessions, shall be under the protection of the holy church, of ourselves, 
and of the archbishops, bishops, and other prelates of the church of 
God. And until they return, or their death is known, we forbid by 
our apostolic authority any lawsuit to be brought against them about 
any of the property of which they were in peaceful possession when 
they took the cross. ... If any are in debt, but with a pure intention 
set out on this holy journey, they shall not pay the interest already due; 
and if they or others are pledged to pay the interest, by our apostolic 
authority we absolve them from their oath or pledge. If their relations 
or the lords on whose fiefs they live can not or will not lend them the 
money (necessary for the journey), they may pawn their lands and 
other possessions to churches, to clergymen, or to others, without the 
consent of the lords of their fiefs," Cf. the moratorium and similar 
protective measures for soldiers during the recent Great War. 

Innocent III (1215) was still more liberal: 

"Now, because it is only just that those who devote themselves to 
the service of the heavenly ruler should enjoy some special prerogative, 
and since it is a little more than a year until the time set for 
S. B,, 288. going, we decree that all who have taken the cross shall be 
R-. 132. free from all exactions, taxes, and other burdens. . , . 

We order the secular authorities to compel the Jews to re- 
mit the interest to all crusaders, and until they do remit it they shall 
have no association with Christians," 



28o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

than he could have expected. Even while he spoke the great 
throng interrupted him with a mighty shout, "It is the will 
„ t of God, it is the will of God," and thousands of 

Success of ' ' 

the Pope's them pressed forward, made a vow to go on the 
expedition, and received a cross of cloth which was 
fastened on their breast or arm. At the close of the council 
the thousands who had been in attendance scattered in all direc- 
tions announcing the new movement and repeating the pope's 
appeal as they went. Urban commissioned various persons 
specially to preach the crusade, and he himself spent the next 
nine months travelling through France, holding councils, and 
persuading people to take the cross. In this, he, as well as 
those whom he sent out, met with an astonishing success. 

The west seemed ripe for such a movement. The Cluniac 
reform which had been growing for nearly two hundred years 
had now reached its height. Under its influence the ascetic 
Th w spirit had enveloped all Europe and had manifested 

was Ripe for itself in the establishment of several new monastic 
orders and in a burning desire to make the pil- 
grimage to Jerusalem — a desire which had become almost a 
passion when the Turkish occupation of Palestine made its 
realization impossible. Returning pilgrims, as has been said 
already, had excited the gaping crowds who gathered to listen 
to them by a harrowing account of the inhuman treatment 
which the Christians received at the hands of the Turks, and 
had awakened in them a strong desire to avenge the wrongs 
of their fellow Christians. The peasants were ready for any- 
thing, because they had been brought to despair by famine, 
caused by a series of disasters, such as floods and drouth, 
which had ruined the crops for some ten years (1085-1095). 
They felt that, no matter where they w^ent or what they under- 
took, they could encounter nothing worse than the hunger 
and pestilence which were destroying them at home. Nor were 
the turbulent nobles less inclined to hear the call. Trained to 
arms and knowing no recreation but feuds and w^ar, many of 
them were eager to engage in an expedition which promised 
such excitements. At the same time, owing to the combined 



THE CRUSADES 281 

efforts of the church and of the governments, society in Europe 
was becoming more stable. For more than a century the church 
had been striving to put an end to feuds and private warfare 
and the truce of God had no doubt had some effect in diminishing 
the violence of the nobility. The numerous checks put upon 
fighting seemed to the nobles like limitations on the exercise 
of their profession, and, since they were repeatedly compelled 
to take an oath not to engage in feuds or private warfare, they 
felt that they were without an occupation and were willing to 
go anywhere, provided they could find unhindered and profitable 
exercise of arms. Since, according to feudal custom, fiefs 
passed to the eldest son, the younger sons, left generally with 
little besides their swords, and having small opportunity to 
rise in the world, were strongly attracted by an expedition which 
had for its avowed object the destruction of the Turks and the 
partition of their lands and possessions. So it is not strange 
that the prospect of novel experiences and thrilling adventures 
in a strange land, the probable acquisition of temporal gain and 
honor, and the certitude of eternal reward, should have caused 
thousands to take the cross. 

The beginning of the crusade was both disappointing and dis- 
graceful, for the first bands that were collected were composed, 
for the most part, of unarmed peasants, vagabonds, thieves, 
and marauders of every description, who were a 
Mobs. ^ scourge to the country wherever they passed. Ur- 
S B 282 ^^^ ^^^ named the middle of August (1096) as the 
time for the journey to begin, but this seemed too 
far away for the peasants. Early in the spring immense num- 
bers of them put their meagre possessions on two-wheeled carts 
and, all unconscious of the hard fate that awaited them, set out 
with their wives and children, hopeful and eager " to be in at the 
death" of the Turk and to secure a large share of the spoils. 
As they passed through village and town they were joined by 
disreputable women and worthless men, who hoped, under the 
cover of a holy warfare and in the general turmoil and confu- 
sion, to ply their evil trades and arts without detection. Some 
of them, ambitious to attract attention and to gain a reputation 



282 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

for holiness which would enable them to prey upon the un- 
suspecting, burned a cross on their bodies with red-hot irons 
and shamelessly asserted that this had been done in a miracu- 
lous manner. They were gathered under various leaders, who 
won an evil distinction because of the unhappy outcome of 
their undertaking. Chief of these were Fulcher,* Gottschalk, 
Emicho, Walter Senzavoir ("Without possessions"), and Peter 
the Hermit. 

The fanatical zeal of these marauders increased with their 
numbers, and every^vhere they turned, as with one accord, 
against the Jews.f Like wild beasts they fell upon that help- 
less and defenseless people and put them to death 
Attacked. with the most barbarous cruelty. In many cities 
of northern France and of the Rhine they almost 
destroyed the Jewish population, either forcing them into exile 
or slaying them. Of the Jews who fell into their hands hardly 

* Fulcher, probably a priest of Orleans, reached Cologne with about 
12,000 persons, mostly peasants with their wives and children, and 
from there set out on the journey (April 23, 1096). They passed 
through Saxony, Bohemia, and Hungary, robbing and plundering as 
they went. Everywhere they sought out the Jews and robbed, tor- 
tured, and killed all who refused to accept Christian baptism. In 
Hungary they took forcible possession of a small town, Neutra, es- 
tablished themselves there, and began the systematic plundering of 
the surrounding country. But the Hungarians collected an army, 
attacked and defeated them, and permitted only a few of them to escape. 

The same fate overtook Gottschalk, a priest, and his army of 15,000, 
who, leaving Mainz (April 30, 1096), passed through Bavaria and the 
east mark into Hungary, living chiefly by plundering. At Wieselburg 
some of them engaged in a drunken brawl and killed a young Hungarian, 
and then the whole band began to rob and plunder the town. The 
Hungarians soon attacked them in force, surrounded them, and com- 
pelled them to surrender. After they had laid down their arms the 
Hungarians fell upon them and cut them to pieces, and only Gott- 
schalk and a mere handful of his followers escaped. 

t In explanation of the position of the Jews in the Middle Age and of 
the persecutions which they suffered, it may be said that they were not 
under the law of the land, but were in the hand of the king. He was 
their only protection and they had to look to him to redress their 
wrongs. In return for his protection, which was often of little value to 
them, he had the right to tax them as often and as heavily as he pleased 
(S. B., 120, 299, 300). Up to about 1000 the Jews in the west were 
traders and peddlers, thus performing a service that was very accepta- 



THE CRUSADES 283 

one escaped death except by denying his rehgion and accepting 
Christian baptism. Some thousands of them remained true 
to their faith and suffered heroic martyrdom.* 

The most famous of all these marauding bands was that led 

by Peter the Hermit and Walter Senzavoir, known as Walter 

the Penniless. It is not certain that Peter was at the council 

of Clermont, but, immediately after its close, ac- 

Peter the 

Hermit. cording to the first authentic information that we 

SB 28^ have of him, he began to preach the crusade in the 
county of Berry. He then moved toward the north, 
visiting the chief cities, everywhere attracting the peasants and 
the most turbulent and worthless elements of society. He 
reached Cologne (April 12, 1096) with 20,000 or more in his 
train. Through his fiery preaching he won about as many 
more in and about Cologne. Many of them grew tired of wait- 
ing, and so about the middle of April, Walter set out with about 
20,000 of them, of whom it is said only eight were knights. 
They seem to have had no difficulty until they reached Semlin 

ble to the Christians. About that time, however, the Christians, who 
were engaging more extensively in commerce, began to try to monop- 
olize it, and so they came to dislike the Jews because they were com- 
petitors in business. Moreover, the business of lending money had 
been in the hands of bishops and abbots, the only persons in the west 
who had money, but in consequence of the Cluniac reform the church 
forbade all Christians to lend money at interest (S. B., 119). The Jews, 
forced, to a certain extent, out of commerce, took up money-lending and 
were hated also on that account. The mob justified its barbarity 
against the Jews by charging them with having crucified Christ. 

* Count William of Melun and Count Emicho of Leiningen, two bar- 
barously cruel noblemen, were perhaps the worst offenders of all, and 
their bands were composed of those numerous small bands which had 
been most violent against the Jews. After committing unspeakable 
atrocities in Cologne, Mainz, Speier, Worms, Metz, Treves, and other 
cities, they marched by different routes through Bavaria and the east 
mark into Hungary. By the union of several of these bands about 
30,000 were collected near Wieselburg, whose inhabitants, remember- 
ing the character of Gottschalk and his followers, closed the gates 
of the city and refused to supply them with food. The crusaders laid 
siege to the city and were on the point of taking it by storm, when, for 
some unknown reason, they became frightened, gave up the siege, and 
fled. So panic-stricken were they that the Hungarians had no diffi- 
culty in destroying them. 



284 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

in Hungary, where, being denied market privileges, some of 
them began to plunder. When the Hungarians attacked 
them, Walter refused to fight and hastened on. He reached 
Constantinople about the 20th of July, where he waited for the 
arrival of Peter the Hermit. 

Peter, with some 20,000, only a few of whom were properly 
armed, left Cologne April 19, 1096. When they reached Sem- 
lin they learned of the losses which the Hungarians had inflicted 
on Walter's followers and, in the desire of avenging them, 
stormed and sacked the city. When a Hungarian army ap- 
proached they hastily fled from Hungary into Bulgaria. Near 
Nisch some of his German followers, believing that they had 
been cheated in the purchase of food, began to burn and plunder. 
The Bulgarians attacked them and put them to flight. Peter 
collected his scattered forces and finally (August i) reached 
Constantinople, where he was joined by Walter. The emperor 
Alexius received them kindly, but his disappointment was 
great; for instead of an army of warriors he saw only helpless, 
unarmed, and undisciplined men, women, and children, who 
were a charge rather than a help to him. Worse than that, 
they despised the Greeks and immediately began to steal, 
plunder, and burn, as if they were in an enemy's country. In 
order to protect the city Alexius hastily sent them across the 
Bosporus and warned them not to proceed into the interior, 
but to wait until the main army of the crusaders should arrive. 
They disregarded his advice, however, and began the march 
toward Nicaea, stopping to plunder wherever they found an 
opportunity. Peter, having lost all control over them, had re- 
turned to Constantinople and they w'ere wholly without dis- 
cipline. Before reaching Nicasa they were attacked by the 
Turks and cut to pieces, only a few hundreds of them -escap- 
ing to Constantinople. Some of these waited there with Peter 
for the main army which was then on its way, but most of them 
were so frightened that they hastily set out for home. 

France and Germany, after the disappearance of these mur- 
derous bands beyond the frontier, again had peac'e, although 
the excitement was unabated; for thousands of nobles were 



THE CRUSADES 285 

arming themselves for the journey, and, accompanied by- 
great numbers of knights, foot-soldiers, and pilgrims, were 
Crusaders Set coU^cting at various places to be ready to begin 
Out, 1096. the march at the appointed time. Count Hugo of 
o., 52. Vermandois, brother of the French king, Philip I, 

'' ^^^' was among the first to leave. With a numerous 

retinue of knights he passed rapidly through Italy and crossed 
from Bari to Durazzo, where the emperor's officials met him 
and conducted him to Constantinople. Alexius honorably 
received him and hospitably entertained him. Since the em- 
peror had appealed to the pope for help and had been assured 
that the crusaders were coming to his aid, it is not strange that 
he should have tried from the very first to fix the conditions 
Rea nable ^P^^ which they Were to fight for him. He could 
Demands of not Safely permit thousands of armed men to enter 
his realm without a clear understanding of their in- 
tentions, nor could he undertake a campaign with their aid 
without defining the relations which should exist between him 
and them. He therefore asked all the leaders of the crusaders 
to take an oath not to injure him or his realm, but to be faith- 
ful to him and to surrender to him any territory which they 
might wrest from the Turks, provided it had once been a part 
of the Greek empire. This oath was not in reality an oath of 
feudal vassalage, although the westerners, interpreting it in the 
light of conditions existing at home, generally regarded it as 
such. It is difficult to see how Alexius could have asked less. 
Unfortunately, however, he was wrong in supposing that the 
crusaders had come to help him. For the leaders 
the Leaders, ^ad come with the fixed intention of securing terri- 
tory and establishing themselves as independent 
princes, indifferent, for the most part, whether at the expense 
of Greek or Turk. The knights who accompanied them, being 
soldiers of fortune, were wilHng to fight where it would be most 
profitable to them, and the rank and file of the crusaders were 
interested chiefly in the recovery of the holy places from the 
Mohammedans. Hugo took the oath apparently without any 
misgiving or objection. 



286 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Godfrey of Bouillon, duke of lower Lotharingia, began the 
journey at the appointed time with 10,000 knights, 30,000 
foot-soldiers, and a host of pilgrims. He was accompanied 
by a number of noblemen, among them his brother Baldwin 
(I) and his nephew Baldwin (II), both of whom 
Bouinon.° were to win renown as kings of Jerusalem. God- 
frey strictly forbade his men to steal or to commit 
any violence whatever, and, passing through the east mark and 
Hungary, entered the Greek empire without opposition from 
the natives. In obedience to the orders of Alexius, the Greeks 
supplied them with food and treated them with the highest 
consideration. When within a few miles of Constantinople, 
however, Godfrey heard that Alexius had taken Hugo and his 
retinue prisoners, and, to avenge the insult, he plundered and 
devastated the country far and wide, clear up to Constantinople, 

which he reached December 2x. Count Hugo can 
C/. R., 125. V . . 

hardly have been held as a prisoner, for he visited 

Godfrey, and, far from holding any resentment against Alexius, 
besought Godfrey to take the oath which the emperor demanded. 
This Godfrey stubbornly refused to do, but permitted his troops 
to plunder and steal as much as they chose. Alexius was forced 
to send his troops against him, and, after some severe fighting, 
Godfrey yielded and took the oath (January 20, 1097). He 
was unable, however, to compel his followers to keep the peace, 
and Alexius soon forced him to move his army across the Bos- 
porus and encamp in Asia Minor (February 20, 1097). 

Raymond, count of Toulouse, tKe first nobleman of im- 
portance to take the cross, led his army, which was somewhat 
smaller than that of Godfrey, through north Italy and down 
the eastern shore of the Adriatic to Durazzo, and 
Toulouse. ^ thence across the Balkan Peninsula to Constanti- 
nople. His troops helped themselves to what they 
needed, and, in consequence, were frequently attacked by the 
inhabitants of the countries through which they passed. After 
stubbornly refusing to take the oath, he finally yielded and soon 
became the fast friend of Alexius. 

The most capable of all the leaders was Bohemond of Tarento, 



THE CRUSADES 287 

the oldest son of Robert Guiscard, who had disinherited him in 
favor of his second son, Roger, to whom he gkve his duchy 

(ApuUa, Calabria, and Sicily). Bohemond, fretted 
Bohemond. by the narrowness of his possessions, and feeling 

himself fitted for greater things, eagerly took the 
cross in the hope of acquiring a territory commensurate with his 
ability and ambition. Although poor, he succeeded in enlist- 
ing a few thousand knights, many of them, like himself, Nor- 
mans and soldiers of fortune. Among them was his nephew^ 
Tancred. Bohemond led his little army across the Adriatic 
and the Balkan Peninsula. Leaving Tancred in charge of his 
army, Bohemond hastened on to Constantinople. Alexius, 
remembering that Bohemond had been the chief assistant of 
Robert Guiscard when he invaded the empire (1081-1085), was 
filled with distrust toward him, and his distrust was changed 
into fear when Bohemond plainly declared that he had come to 
make his fortune and that he hoped to obtain territory where 
he could establish himself as an independent ruler, and asked to 
be put at the head of a large force of imperial troops. Alexius 
dissembled his feelings under a cloak of friendship and Bohe- 
mond took the oath with the utmost readiness. No sooner 
was Tancred left in charge of the army than trouble began; 
for he hated the Greeks so deeply that Bohemond only by the 
most stringent measures had restrained him from acts of wan- 
ton violence against them. Now that Bohemond was no Ipnger 
present Tancred set his troops to pillaging the country. When 
they reached Constantinople Tancred disguised himself and 
crossed the Bosporus in order to escape taking the oath to the 
emperor. 

The last to reach Constantinople (middle of May, 1097) were 
Count Robert of Normandy, son of William the Conqueror, 
O 53 his brother-in-law. Count Stephen of Blois, and 

R., 126. Count Robert of Flanders, each with a considerable 

No following. The crusaders, accompanied by a de- 

ganiza ion. ^^^^j^j^gj^^ q£ ^j^g Greek army, had already left Con- 
stantinople and were on their way to Nicaea. There was 
hardly a semblance of organization in the army, which was 



288 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

composed of probably 100,000 fighting men and perhaps as 
many more unarmed men, priests, women, and children. Each 
leader provided as best he could for the needs of those who had 
joined him, and led them forward with no regard to the move- 
ments of the other divisions. The vanguard 
NiSa? 1007. J*^3,ched Nicaea May 6, while the rear-guard did not 
arrive until June 3. The siege was conducted with 
great vigor, but with little prospect of success, until the Greeks 
hauled some boats overland on wagons and launched them on 
the small lake which washed the west walls of the city. On 
the morning of June 18 the Greeks and crusaders made a united 
attack by sea and land. The besieged, well knowing what they 
would suffer at the hands of the crusaders, who were eager to 
pillage the place, surrendered to the Greeks, who promptly 
closed the gates of the city against the crusaders. Alexius, 
delighted to recover the rich city almost undamaged by the 
siege, called all the leaders to him and placated them with valu- 
able gifts. He directed them to proceed through Asia Minor 
as they had begun, while he would take a route farther north, 
but parallel to theirs. For in this way he calculated that the 
two armies would be more easily provisioned and would wrest 
more territory from the Turks. The leaders were pleased with 
his generous treatment of them and renewed their oaths to him. 
The army and the pilgrims, however, although he distributed 
a large sum of money among them, were enraged that he had 
not permitted them to sack Nicaea and cursed him for what 
they were pleased to call his treachery. 

The crusaders occupied the summer of 1097 with their march 
through Asia Minor. They suffered somewhat from the at- 
tacks of the Turks, but hunger, thirst, heat, and disease were 
The March their deadliest foes, cutting them down by the 
Ask^Minor thousands. After they passed Iconium they suf- 
1097. fered less from thirst and the Christian inhabitants 

supplied their wants. At Heraclea (Eregli) Tancred, who, in 
his eagerness to secure the best of the booty, had always kept 
as far as possible in advance of the army, determined to strike 
out for himself. He was joined by a number of knights who 



THE CRUSADES 289 

were of the same mind as he, and set out over the mountains 
to Tarsus. Baldwin I, who was jealous of Tancred and bent 
on having a share of any spoil he might take, followed him with 
a still larger force. Tancred reached Tarsus first. The Turk- 
ish garrison promptly fled, and the inhabitants, who were 
Christians, were on the point of surrendering to him, when 
Baldwin arrived and proposed that they sack the city in com- 
mon. Tancred refused and, as his troops were outnumbered 
by those of Baldwin, withdrew and continued his march. 
Again Baldwin followed him, and a pitched battle 

Fight over , . . . . 

Spoils. over spoils ensued between their forces. After 

Baldwin I both sides had suffered some loss they came to 
Goes to ^hgjj. senses and made peace. While Tancred 

Edessa. ... 

moved eastward to rejoin the main army, Baldwin 
accepted an invitation to come to Edessa, a Christian (Arme- 
nian) city beyond the Euphrates. With about two hundred 
knights he reached the city and was so successful in a bold 
campaign against the Turks that the people of Edessa killed 
their prince and chose Baldwin to rule over them. 

From Heraclius the main army turned sharply to the north- 
east till they reached Caesarea, and then marched south to 
Antioch, which they reached October 21, 1097. Antioch 
g. , was a prosperous city in the midst of a fertile terri- 

Antioch, tory, and therefore it appealed strongly to the am- 
bition of the leaders, who determined to get posses- 
sion of it. With the shortsightedness which had characterized 
their conduct from the beginning, the crusaders wasted the 
provisions, grain, and cattle which they found in the neighbor- 
hood so that they soon began to suffer from hunger. While 
some of them engaged in daily skirmishes with the enemy, others 
foraged, putting the country for miles around under contribu- 
tion. Sickness broke out in the camp and many, losing cour- 
age, deserted and tried to return to Europe. The outlook of 
the crusaders was so hopeless that the detachment of Greek 
troops which, in accordance with the emperor's promise, had 
accompanied them, withdrew from the siege and returned to 
the emperor. In the spring of 1098, however, the crusaders re- 



290 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

newed the siege with greater energy, because they learned that 
a large Turkish army was coming to the relief of the city. It 
seems surprising that the crusaders were able to reach Syria 
without encountering more opposition and that they should 
have spent seven months before Antioch, in the very heart of 
the enemy's country, without having been attacked by over- 
whelming numbers. The emirs, however, were in rebellion 
against the central government and were so mutually jealous 
that they were unwilling to do anything in aid of one another. 
But for this political disruption the Turks could easily have 
destroyed the crusaders. The emir of Mosul was now bringing 
an army to the relief of Antioch, but he was marching at his 
leisure, and his forces were weakened by disunion and were 
ready to desert him. 

Some time before this Bohemond had secretly bribed a Turk- 
ish emir who had charge of the defense of some of the towers 
to betray the city to him. Bohemond asked the leaders first 
to swear that the city should belong to the one who 
Befrayed. ^^^ most to do with its Capture. This they all 
refused to do, because of their oath to Alexius. 
Bohemond replied that, as the emperor had not kept his promise 
to them, they were released from their oath to him. This they 
denied, and declared that as the dangers and labors of all had 
been equal, they should all have an equal share in the spoils. 
Bohemond bided his time and when the Turkish army was 
within a few days' march of Antioch he told the leaders that he 
would take the city if they would give him the oath which he 
demanded. As the danger was pressing they yielded and 
agreed that Bohemond should have the city, but should sur- 
render it to Alexius if the latter should fulfil all his former agree- 
ments. The following night the treacherous emir admitted 
Bohemond and a number of his men to one of the towers. The 
Th c d ^^^^ morning (June 3, 1098) the crusaders made a 
ers Besieged united attack, and, as Bohemond opened the gates 

in Antioch. . 1 • • i i • • r n 

from the inside, they were soon in possession of all 
the city except the citadel. Two days later the emir of Mosul 
arrived and the crusaders were in turn besieged; their cour- 



THE CRUSADES 291 

age sank from day to day as the certainty of their capture 
increased. They were saved, however, by the successful 
execution of a pious fraud — the discovery of the "holy" lance 
with which the side of Jesus had been pierced — which so re- 
kindled their enthusiasm and fanaticism that they defeated 
the Turks and caused them to raise the siege. 

The way was now open to Jerusalem, but as a quarrel arose 
among the leaders as to what should be done with Antioch, 
they determined to spend the summer there. Raymond of 
Q , Toulouse had broken his oath, seized a part of the 

among the city and fortified it, and refused to surrender it to 

Bohemond. While waiting for the quarrel to be 
ended, and also to escape the plague which had just broken 
out in Antioch, the crusaders, in the hope of making other con- 
quests, scattered in all directions. Bohemond led a large force 
into Cilicia to assist the Armenians and make them his friends, 
since they were to be his neighbors; Tancred skirmished through 
northern Syria; Godfrey went to Edessa to visit his brother 
Baldwin; and the other leaders sought fame and fortune by 
trying to wrest other provinces from the Turks. So intent were 
the leaders in pursuing their private ends that they seemed to 
forget Jerusalem entirely. Not till November did they return 
to Antioch. They were then as far as ever from an agreement 
as to what should be done with the city. The pilgrims and 
common men now made themselves heard. They declared 
that if the leaders did not cease from their strife and proceed 
at once to Jerusalem they would burn Antioch and choose other 
commanders. The leaders were thus forced to set out, leaving 
Bohemond in possession of Antioch. Raymond of Toulouse 
made a show of starting, but stopped to lay siege to every town 
by the way. Bohemond, now that he had what he sought — a 

principality — had no intention of going on to Jeru- 
Bum the salem. Nevertheless he followed Raymond for the 
uTjemsakm^ purpose of keeping him from establishing himself in 

any city near Antioch. In this he was successful, 
and after Raymond had gone a sufficient distance Bohemond 
returned to Antioch. Raymond continued to waste the time 



292 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of the crusaders in fruitless and unnecessary sieges until they 
lost all patience, set fire to their tents, and began a mad 
race which did not end until they reached Jerusalem. At 
the sight of his burning tents and the disobedience and deser- 
tion of his men, Raymond wept with rage, but was powerless 
further to retard the progress of the crusade. 

They reached Jerusalem, June 7, 1099, and in spite of their 
sufferings from heat and thirst prosecuted the siege with great 
energy. Their fanatical zeal was stirred as never before and, 
Sie e of although the city was surrounded by high walls 

Jerusalem, and was Strongly garrisoned, they stormed and took 
it July 15 (1099). Scenes of indescribable bar- 
barity ensued. They murdered the Mohammedan inhabi- 
tants, men, women, and children, without mercy, and sacked 
and plundered till they were exhausted. Covered with blood 
and laden with spoils they ended the day with a great proces- 
sion to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, where, in the midst 
of hysterical rejoicings, they gave thanks to God for their vic- 
tory. The next day they renewed their search for booty, and 
completed the bloody work which had been interrupted by 
darkness. Eight days later, when they met to decide what 
disposition they should make of the city, some of the clergy 
wished the highest authority to be vested in a clerical head 
(presumably a patriarch), under whom a layman should be 
rr, r , chosen to administer secular affairs. The leaders 

The Leaders 

Quarrel about objected to this, and although they were all bitter 
against Raymond of Toulouse, they offered him the 
city. He refused it for various reasons. Jerusalem was 
neither on the sea nor on an important caravan route; it was 
without industries and commerce, and because of its situation 
it could never become the seat of a powerful principality. 
Jerusalem was too remote from Antioch to serve his purpose, 
for he had determined to devote the rest of his life, if necessary, 

^, „ to the destruction of Bohemond, so deep had his 

Cf. R., 127, . 

hatred and resentment become; so he wished to ac- 
quire territory in the north of Syria, where he could more easily 
lie in wait to destroy him. They then chose Godfrey of Bouil- 



THE CRUSADES 293 

Ion, who accepted it, but, refusing the title of king, called 
himself prince, duke, or advocate (protector) of the holy grave. 
A few days later the crusaders were called out to repulse an 
army that was approaching from Eg3/pt. The battle took 
place before the walls of Ascalon and the Christians were com- 
pletely victorious (August 12). They would even 
Ascalon. ^ ^ have taken Ascalon but for a quarrel that arose 
between Godfrey and Raymond of Toulouse about 
who should have it. Raymond had no intention of remaining 
there, but he was unwilling to cede the city to Godfrey, who 
would have been greatly strengthened by the possession of it. 

The first crusade was now at an end. Of all the hosts that 
had begun it, not more than 20,000 were left to return home. 
Laden with relics and booty they marched to the north 
along the Mediterranean coast until they reached 
CrusSers. ^ Laodicaea, whence most of them sailed for some 
Italian port. Raymond of Toulouse, however, 
remained in Laodicaea, and by the help of the Greek emperor 
soon got possession of several towns, among them Tripolis, 
which came to serve as the capital of his principality. As 
count of Tripolis he spent the brief remainder of his life (d. 1105) 
in a struggle to build up his own power. Selfish, ambitious, 
and incapable of working in harmony with others, he was to the 
end a troublesome neighbor to the rulers of the other crusader 
states. 

The material success of the first crusade was small indeed, 
Alexius had recovered a small part of AsiaC Minor; the Ar- 
menians had received some aid in their struggle with the Turks; 
Results of Baldwin I had got possession of an Armenian city, 
the First Edessa, which, it must be remembered, was already 
Christian; Bohemond had obtained a small prin- 
cipality with Antioch as its capital; Raymond of Toulouse had 
Laodicaea, the beginning of a small state; and Godfrey of 
Bouillon had Jerusalem. Such was the meagre outcome of this 
great expedition which had begun with high promise. But 
that which counted for the most glorious success was the re- 
covery of the Holy Sepulchre, the news of which gave Europe 



294 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

a paroxysm of joy. Thousands reproached themselves as lag- 
gards for having missed the opportunity to have a share in so 
glorious a work, and now, in a fit of the wildest enthusiasm, 
they hastened to the east in the hope of still achieving great- 
ness. Puffed up with the ambition to do greater things than 
had been accomplished by the first crusade, they determined to 
attack the Mohammedan power in its principal seat, and so 
set out for Bagdad. The army, which was proceeding in three 
divisions and numbered probably more than 100,000, was cut 
to pieces by the Turks in Asia Minor, and the Mohamme-dan 
slave markets were glutted with the Christians who were taken 
prisoners. 

The history of these petty crusader states (they are some- 
times called Latin states) is quite unimportant. It is difficult 
for us to realize how insignificant they were. Godfrey was left 
Petty Char- with Only a few fighting men and his kingdom at 
Cnasader ^ ^^st hardly extended beyond the walls of Jerusa- 
states. Iqyti, But the pious imagination of the west pic- 

tured him as a powerful king living in unparalleled splendor 
and magnificence. Nor were the rulers of the other crusader 
states much more powerful. Nothing could be more wearisome 
than a detailed account of their history, for it is full of petty 
jealousy, ambitious intrigue, unsavory scandal, civil strife, and 
treacherous murder. They fought against one another quite 
as much as against the Turks, and more than once allied them- 
selves with the Turks to destroy one another. The inhabitants 
seemed to acquire the vices of both Mohammedans and Chris- 
tians and to practise the virtues of neither. The 

Commerce. , . ^ . . , . . , . , , 

chief mterest m these states is in the fact that they 
developed an extensive and important commerce with Europe 
which had a quickening and civilizing influence on the west. 
For by this means a part of what was best in the Mohammedan 
civilization was introduced into Europe. 

This commerce was in the hands of the Italian cities, chief 
of which were Venice and Genoa, although many others had 
no small part in it. It was conducted in a peculiar way. A 
quarter in an eastern city, consisting of a number of squares 



THE CRUSADES 295 

(blocks) was granted to any western city that might ask for it. 
The western city, or, as we may call it, the home city, then peo- 
pled this quarter with its colonists. The quarter was sur- 
rounded with a wall and quite cut off from the rest of the city, 
its gates being closed in the evening and opened in the morning. 
These colonists acted as the agents of the merchants of the 
home city, buying the articles with which the ships were to 
be loaded on their return voyage and selling to the natives those 
which made up the cargoes of the incoming ships. The govern- 
ment of the quarter was controlled by the home city, which 
sent out an official for this purpose. He was expected to make 
frequent reports on the state of the colony, the articles for 
which there was a demand, and to give any other information 
that might be of service to the government as well as to the 
merchants of the home city. This was the origin 

Consul. "^ ° 

of the office of the modern consul, who now plays so 
important a part in the commercial interests in all civilized 
countries. Among the numerous articles which through this 
commerce were carried from the orient into Europe may be 
mentioned sugar, incense, perfumes, a great variety of spices, 
glassware, precious stones, and all kinds of textile fabrics, 
such as silk, cloths, linen, muslin, rugs, and carpets. 

Almost every year saw small bands of adventurous knights 

on the road to Jerusalem, where they hoped to ''make their 

fortune." These, however, are of no interest to us, and even 

the later crusades may be dismissed with few words, 

Fall of Edessa, r i>i, i. r ..i. j ^ 

1 144, Leads to for, although some of them caused a great com- 
saderii47- ^otion in Europe, they accomplished nothing in 
1 149- the east. The capture of Edessa by the Moham- 

s. B., 284. medans (1144) led to the second crusade. Louis 
Louis VII. VII of France, already feeling that he ought to 
Tj Q go on a crusade because of the unfulfilled vow of 

R., 128, 129. ^^ 

his brother, whose crown he had inherited, re- 
sponded to the first call and took the cross. The pope approved 
his action and commissioned St. Bernard of Clair vaux to 
preach and organize the expedition. As he passed through 
France, thousands, at his appeal, took the cross. He then 



296 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

went to Germany, where he had the same phenomenal success. 

After several fiery appeals he finally persuaded 

even the king, Conrad III (1133-1152), to take upon 
himself the crusader's vow. Fanatical enthusiasm ran high 
in both France and Germany, and again expressed itself in the 

most inhuman persecution of the Jews. Conrad, 
theArn^.° ^^ ^ell as Louis, collected an immense army, the 

efficiency of which was greatly diminished by the 
lack of organization, and by the presence of a great number of 
unarmed pilgrims and worthless and vicious camp-followers, 
who had been encouraged by the high promises of St. Bernard 
to join the expedition. St. Bernard looked upon the crusade 
not as a military expedition, which should be conducted in a 
sensible way, but rather as a religious demonstration, the 
success of which depended on numbers rather than on the 
Destroyed in ^^^^^S qualities of the crusaders. Both armies 
Asia Minor. ^^Qre destroyed in Asia Minor, and only a few thou- 
Blundersin sand of them reached Jerusalem. Then, instead 

of attacking those emirs who were threatening the 
Christians, they committed the serious blunder of laying siege 
to Damascus, whose emir was friendly to them. The siege was 
unsuccessful and the crusaders, angry with the people of Jeru- 
salem, to whose stupidity and short-sighted policy this mistake 
was due, returned to Europe with the feeling that the Christians 
in the east were of such a character that they were not worthy 
of the great efforts which the west had made to relieve them. 

The news of the conquest of Jerusalem by Saladin, in 1187, 
stirred the west profoundly and led the three chief sover- 
eigns of Europe to join in the third crusade. Frederick Bar- 

barossa, profiting by the experience which he had had 
Crusade, as a youth in the second crusade, refused to permit 
II 9 1 192. ^^^ ^^^ ^^ j^.^ j^.^ expedition who was not well 

Barbaro^sa a-^med and supplied with enough money to pay his 
expenses. In this way he collected an army of per- 
haps more than a hundred thousand fighting men. 
He met with determined opposition from the Greek emperor, 
who had made an alliance with the Mohammedans to prevent 



Note to Map XI. — This map shows (i) the routes followed by the crusaders 
on the first four crusades; (2) the crusader states established in Syria and 
Palestine; (3) the two hostile caliphates of Bagdad and Cairo; (4) the 
Turkish possessions in Asia Minor, and (5) the Christian kingdom of Ar- 
menia, many cities of which were held by Turkish garrisons, a fact which 
could not be indicated on the map. 




30 



A 



F 



R 



A 



' L.I.. POATES CO., N.Y. 



20 



Longitude 



26 



East 



THE CRUSADES 297 

the crusading army from reaching the east. But Frederick was 
successful in passing Constantinople and in leading his army 
through Asia Minor. On the march thousands of his men 
perished of thirst, heat, and disease, but the worst of the jour- 
ney was passed when, to the dismay of all, Frederick was 
drowned (June 10, 1190) while trying to ford the Saleph River 
(a few miles west of Tarsus). His soldiers were so overwhelmed 
by this misfortune that a large majority of them hastened to 
return to Europe; of the others, some, losing all faith in the 
Christian religion, deserted and adopted the Mohammedan 
faith, and only a few thousand of them proceeded to Pales- 
tine. 

Philip II of France and Richard Lionheart of England, 
fearing the dangers of the journey by land, sailed with more 
than 100,000 men from different Mediterranean ports. They 
Phili II and ^^^^^^ ^^ Messina in Sicily, where they determined 
Richard to Spend the winter (11 90-1 191). They were 

joined there by a fleet of more than a hundred large 
transports and an immense number of smaller craft, which, 
loaded with men, had sailed from England. The kings soon 
Quarrels quarrelled, being separated by jealousy and mutu- 
ally conflicting interests. When they finally reached 

Rival Kings. -r» , . / • \ i <• t 

ralestme (1191, sprmg) they found two men con- 
tending for the title of king of Jerusalem. To make matters 
worse, Richard supported one of these and Philip the other. 
One of these claimants had, in his own interests 
118^-1191^.^°' ^^^ without any consideration of the general wel- 
fare, begun the siege of Acre (or Acco, August, 
1 1 89). The armies of the two kings might have accomplished 
something if they had made a united campaign into the interior. 
But they gathered at Acre to assist in the siege, which was 
made famous by the feats of valor and chivalry that were per- 
formed on both sides. But besides being decimated, the army 
lost valuable time there. They finally took Acre (July, 1191), 
but its capture hardly improved the situation of the Christians 
in the east. 
Philip II immediately sailed home, but Richard remained 



298 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

more than a year in Palestine. In all that time, however, he 
accomplished nothing of importance. With the greatest vacil- 
lation he planned campaigns only to give them up 
theCnisade. ^^ ^^^ ^^^Y iTioment when they promised to be 
successful. Without the least appreciation of the 
responsibilities that rested upon him, he wasted his time in 
the quest of knightly adventures. More than once he could, 
by a little diplomacy, have secured almost the whole kingdom 
of Jerusalem, but from sheer lack of practical common sense 
failed to take advantage of the opportunities. He was in most 
respects a model knight — the perfection of romantic chivalry. 
But this very fact rendered him incapable of conducting a 
crusade in a sensible manner. The third crusade ended in a 
deep and humiliating failure when he sailed away from Palestine 
Th L St (September, 1192). At a very conservative esti- 
Crusade on a mate it had cost 300,000 lives and had accom- 
plished nothing but the capture of Acre. It was 
the last great effort to destroy the Mohammedan power. The 
popes continued to make frantic appeals to all Europe to make 
a crusade, and thousands of people took the crusader's vow 
upon them, but for various reasons no great expedition was 
Th w t ^^^^ again made. The political situation in the 
had Other west had a good deal to do with this; in England 

Interests 

the people were engaged in a great struggle with the 
king for the preservation of their rights; in France the king 
was occupied with the task of increasing his power at the ex- 
pense of the feudal nobility; and in Germany and Italy the 
emperor was involved in a life-and-death struggle with the pope 
for supremacy. The natural leaders of a crusade being thus 
engaged at home with pressing personal interests, all Europe 
could never again be united to undertake a crusade. Never- 
theless the east still offered attractions of many kinds to the 
restless, ambitious nobles of Europe, and for nearly a century 
almost every year saw the departure of one or more com- 
panies of knights who went to the east to try the fortune of 
arms against the Mohammedans. 

The emperor, Henry VI, was led by force of circumstances 



THE CRUSADES 299 

to undertake a crusade. When a new king was chosen for 
the kingdom of Jerusalem, which existed now only in name, he 
p, , determined to become the vassal of Henry VI and 

Henry VI, thus receive the royal title from an emperor. Henry 

VI received the feudal oath of the new king through 
ambassadors and promised to come to Cyprus to crown him. 
At the same time Leo, king of Armenia, wishing to free him- 
self from the claims which the Greek emperor had over him, also 
offered to become the vassal of Henry VI. In the hope of 
extending his power in the east, Henry took the cross (1195) 
and began to make extensive preparations for the expedition. 
He had already sent several thousand crusaders in advance 
when his death (September, 1197) put an end to the prepa- 
rations. 

The expedition which is called the fourth crusade (i 202-1 204) 
did not proceed against the Mohammedans. It was a freeboot- 
ing sort of undertaking by a few thousand French knights, 

soldiers of fortune, who, while servinsr the crusad- 

The Fourth . i i . r fi i • 

Crusade At- mg cause, hoped to acquire fame, wealth, and terri- 
Greek^Em- ^^^Y ^^ ^he east. They went to Venice expecting 
P^"^^' to hire Venetian boats to transport them to Egypt, 

1 202-1 204. , , ^ OJ L- f 

against which they had planned to proceed, but 
when the time of sailing arrived they were not able to pay the 
passage money. Venice was at that time eager to increase its 
possessions on the east shore of the Adriatic and now fitted out 
an expedition for this purpose. The city offered to take the 
crusaders into its pay and, with a great show of disinterested- 
ness, pointed out that this would give them an excellent op- 
portunity to pay for their passage and thus enable them to 
complete their projected crusade. The crusaders accepted, 
the expedition sailed promptly, and they were successful in 
taking Triest, Muglia, and Zara (autumn, 1202). The cru- 
saders were then turned from their original purpose of attack- 
ing Egypt and directed against Constantinople. The emperor, 
Isaac Angelus, had been dethroned (1195) by his brother, Alexius 
III, blinded, and imprisoned with his son, Alexius Angelus. 
The son, however, escaped from prison and fled to the court of 



300 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

his brother-in law, Philip, king of Germany, who was married 
to his sister, the Greek princess, Irene. 

It chanced that the leader of the crusade, Boniface of Mont- 
ferrat, was at that time also at the court of Philip, and, being a 
soldier of fortune, eagerly listened to the rich inducements which 
Alexius Angelus offered to him, and to the crusaders, if they 
would assist him to recover the throne of his father. Alexius 
promised that, if they were successful in restoring him and his 
father to the throne, he would subject the Greek church to the 
pope, keep the crusading army supplied with provisions, pay 
them 200,000 marks, maintain 500 knights in Palestine as long 
as he should live, and either go with them in person on a cam- 
paign against Egypt, or send 10,000 soldiers in his place for one 
year. He also promised the Venetians 30,000 marks for their 
assistance. This served the interests of the Venetians very 
well, for, in the first place, they had friendly commercial rela- 
tions with the Mohammedans in Egypt, and, in the second 
place, they were bitterly hostile to the people of Constantinople 
because of the commercial rivalry existing between them. Con- 
stantinople had a monopoly in the rich commerce of the Black 
Sea and would not permit Venetian vessels to pass through the 
Bosporus. By aiding the emperor Alexius and his father to 
recover their throne, the Venetians might hope to secure large 
commercial privileges and concessions in the east. They per- 
suaded the crusaders that the Greeks were in the way of the 
success of a crusade and appealed to the deep hatred which the 
west had cherished against the Greeks ever since the first 
rp , p crusade. The crusaders finally closed the bargain, 
stantinopie, and Sailed against Constantinople. They took it 
(July, 1203), restored the old emperor, Isaac Ange- 
lus, and his son to the throne as they had agreed to do, and 
demanded the immediate fulfilment of the promises which the 
son had made them. But he had promised more than he could 
perform. In the quarrel that followed, the crusaders stormed 
and sacked Constantinople. The emperor fled and established 
himself in Asia Minor, while the crusaders carved that part 
of the Greek empire which they had taken into several small 



THE CRUSADES 301 

principalities, which were then given to westerners. Venice 
received three-eighths of the empire as its share of the spoils 

and Constantinople became the seat of a so-called 
Partitioned^ Latin empire which existed to 1261, when the 

Greeks reconquered the city and re-established 
the Greek empire. The chief effect of the fourth crusade was 
to increase the power, wealth, and commerce of Venice. 

Europe was now thoroughly disgusted with the manner in 
which the crusades had been conducted, as well as with their 
failure. Devout minds declared that the sins of the crusaders 

were the cause of the disasters which had wrecked 
dren's Cru- all the crusades; that God would not deign to work 
sa e, 1212. miracles and deliver the holy places when the cru- 
The French saders themselves were so wicked. They asserted 

Children. , _ -^ 

that, if an army of truly good and innocent persons, 
who were seeking not their own selfish and ambitious end shut 
the redemption of the holy land, were sent to the east, God 
would deliver the Mohammedans into their hands. Out of 
such considerations and the deep yearning for the possession of 
the holy places sprang the preposterous idea of sending an army 
of unarmed children to the east to do battle with the Turks. 
Not that the children would be able to destroy them, but God, 
moved by their innocence and faith, would come to their aid 
in a series of mighty miracles, overwhelm the enemy, and 
restore the holy land to them. So, in June, 121 2, near Vendome 
in France, a shepherd boy named Stephen began to preach a 
crusade of children, declaring that Christ had appeared to him 
and commissioned him to lead an army of children to the sure 
recovery of the holy land; that, as the children of Israel had 
once passed through the Red Sea, so the Lord would make a 
way for them through the Mediterranean that they might pass 
through it dry-shod. Nothing is more characteristic of the 
Middle Age than the fact that this statement met with instant 
and enthusiastic acceptance. The news of the movement 
spread with unprecedented rapidity through France and west- 
ern Germany. In a short time more than 30,000 French chil- 
dren were gathered about Stephen who led them to Marseilles 



302 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

in the confident expectation that the sea would open and give 
them an easy passage to Palestine. When they had waited 
for some time in vain for this, some slave- traders, with cruel 
calculation, offered to transport them in vessels free of charge. 
They filled seven ships with children and sailed away only to 
deliver them, unsuspecting and helpless, into the hands of Mo- 
hammedan slave-dealers in Africa. 

Along the Rhine a boy named Nicolas preached the crusade. 
He gathered about 20,000 German children at Cologne and led 
them over the Alps into Italy. Some of them 
Chfidre™^^ reached Brindisi, but since the sea did not open for 
them, and there were no boats to transport them, 
they finally turned back. Only a few of them reached their 
homes. 

Innocent III (i 198-12 16) devoted much energy and effort 
to bring about another great crusade, but his death suddenly 
checked the monster preparations which he was making. King 
Andrew of Hungary, however, had taken the vow 
s. ., 286-288. ^^^ YiQ finally sailed. His crusade, numbered the 
The Fifth fifth (1217-1222), captured Damietta in Egypt 
1 2 17-1222, (12 19) after a memorable siege and gave promise 
E^ypt. <^f still greater successes. However, the crusaders 

fought over the division of the booty which they 
took in the city, and those who were in charge of the expedi- 
tion quarrelled with one another constantly, and conducted 
it in such a blundering way that the Mohammedans finally 
retook the city, and the crusade ended in a complete failure. 
The sixth crusade (i 228-1 229) was remarkable in that, with- 
out fighting, it resulted in the acquisition of Jerusalem, Beth- 
lehem, Nazareth, and a considerable strip of land lying along 
the sea and connecting all the places still in the hands of the 
Christians. This success was due to the diplomacy of Frederick 
II, who took advantage of the civil wars which were distracting 
the Mohammedans. The last twb crusades are connected with 
the name of Louis IX, king of France. In 1248 he made an 
unsuccessful invasion of Egypt and spent some time in Palestine 



THE CRUSADES 303 

without, however, accomplishing anything. In 1270 he again 
set out on a crusade against Egypt, but while on the way changed 
the destination of his expedition. The bey of Tunis, it was 
said, wished to become a Christian, but, because of the fanati- 
cism of his subjects, did not dare accept Christianity except un- 
der the appearance of compulsion. Deceived by this report the 
crusaders sailed to Tunis, where Louis died of the plague (August 
25, 1270). His brother, Charles of Anjou, then king of Sicily, 
arrived about the same time and assumed charge of the siege. 
After the crusaders had obtained some advantages the bey 
offered to make terms. He was compelled to pay a large sum 
to the crusaders to raise the siege, and also a heavy annual 
tribute to Charles of Anjou. 

The fate of the crusader states, which had long been fore- 
seen, could no longer be postponed. The later crusades had 
brought them no relief, and their outlook became darker and 
^ ,.^. . darker. To the very end the insane rivalry be- 

Conditions in -^ -^ 

the Crusader tween the \^arious principalities and cities grew 
worse, and the two orders, the Templars and the 
Knights of St. John, fought each- other with increasing fury. 
They were more hostile to each other than to the Mohamme- 
dans, and their constant feuds w^orked great injury to the cause 
which they had been organized to protect. Since the Christians 
were so faithless, so divided, and so hostile to one another, it 
seems strange that they should have held out as long as they did. 
Only the great fortresses which the orders had built and a few 
of the cities were still in their hands. In the thirteenth cen- 
tury the Turks reconquered all the places which the Christians 
still held. In 1244 they took Jerusalem and held 
it, it may be said, till 191 7, when the English re- 
covered it. Foot by foot they won their way to the coast, and 
in 1 291 they retook Acre, Sidon, Beirut, Chaifa, Tortosa, and, 
last of all, Athlith {castrum peregrinorum), a fortress of the 
Templars, which had been regarded as impregnable, and Syria 
was again wholly in the possession of Mohammedans. 
The Middle Age had two ideals, the soldier and the monk. 



304 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The monk was the spiritual, the soldier the military hero. The 
peculiar conditions existing on the border-land between Chris- 
,,.,. tians and Mohammedans, that is, in Palestine and 

Military- . „ . , r • r i 

Monkish m Spam, caused a fusion of these two ideals in the 

creation of military-monkish orders, whose members 

S. B., 26sa, -were both monks and soldiers. Three of these orders 
266. 

gained great renown: the Templars, established in 
1 1 19, the Hospitalers, or Knights of St. John, established a few 
years later, and the German order, founded in 1190. With the 
failure of the crusades they were driven out of the east. The 
Th T Templars withdrew to Europe where they found 

plars. no work to do. Their lazy and purposeless exist- 

The Hospita- cnce was brought to an end early in the fourteenth 
'^""^V century by the king of France and the pope. The 

The German Hospitalers established themselves at first in the 

island of Rhodes and continued the war with the 
Turks, but were eventually dislodged. Malta then received 
them, from which they came to be known as the Knights of 
Malta. Early in the thirteenth century the German order 
settled among the Slavs of Prussia and conquered, Christian- 
ized, and Germanized them. It took possession of a large Slavic 
territory and became a real state. In the sixteenth century, 
however, the order was dissolved and its territory passed into 
the possession of the elector of Brandenburg.* 
We come now, at the end, to consider the most important 

question of all: How did the crusades affect the 
Crusades. ^ peoples of Europe? From the nature of the case 

it is impossible to weigh such matters accurately 
and so it is quite as easy to underrate their effects as it is to 
overrate them. We can, however, make a few definite state- 
ments in answer to the question. 

I. It is certain that the crusades increased commerce and 
T , the carrying trade immensely, and so did much 

Increased -' o j ^ 

Commerce. to increase the wealth of Europe. Of course, it 

* Similar orders, that achieved a considerable local reputation, were 
established in Spain during the twelfth century for the purpose of fight- 
ing the Moors. 



THE CRUSADES 305 

was the cities along the coast of the Mediterranean that profited 
most in this way, but the interior of Europe also shared in the 
commerce and derived great profit from it. 

2. Europe also benefited immensely from the introduction of 
many new articles, some of luxury, many of common use, and 
all adding to the knowledge and well-being of the people. We 
„ ^ can hardly estimate the civilizing effect of the intro- 

Gave Europe -^ ^ *=• 

Many New duction of such articles as all kinds of textile fabrics 
— silks, cloths, linen, muslin, rugs, carpets — glass- 
ware, sugar, spices, precious stones, perfumes, incense, and the 
culture of many kinds of fruits and flowers. Damascus blades 
and Morocco leather betray their origin by their names. We 
might easily extend the following list of words which indicate, 
to a certain extent, the influence of the Mohammedan civiliza- 
tion on Europe, although we cannot always affirm that their 
introduction was due directly to the crusades. But either the 
words themselves or the articles for which they stand, in many 
cases both, were derived from the Mohammedans. They are: 
sugar; citron, rice, pomegranate, peach, watermelon, musk- 
melon, apricot, artichoke, alfalfa, cotton, muslin, damask, dam- 
son, cordovan, cordwain, saffron, henna, borax, nitre, hashish, 
assassin, alchemy, alcohol, alkali, azimuth, elixir, alembic, 
amalgam, nadir, zenith, kermes, bazaar, algebra, zero, hazard, 
almanac, lute, talisman, alcove, and gazelle. 

3. There is no question that the crusaders learned from the 
Mohammedans much in the art of war. They were impressed 
with the effectiveness of swift, light cavalry, they observed the 

scientific skill with which cities and fortresses were 
Arf of^ar.^^ fortified, and for the first time they saw instruments 
"- cleverly adapted for besieging and defending such 

strongholds. The knowledge which they thus acquired in the 
east led to the modification of European methods of fortifying 
and besieging. 

4. More important still was their effect in quickening the 
intellect and widening the mental horizon of Europe. In every 
village returning crusaders delighted in pouring into the ears 
of eager and gaping crowds the story of their wanderings, of 



3o6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

what they had seen and experienced. In this way the cru- 
sades largely increased the meagre stock of geographical knowl- 
edge which Europeans possessed, and awakened in 
the inteUect. them an interest in foreign lands. They not only 
ushered in, they also helped create, the period 
.of voyage and discovery. A study of the intellectual life of 
Europe in the period during the crusades and immediately fol- 
lowing them shows that the people were rapidly growing in 
j^ g . intelligence and knowledge. This growth was ac- 

tific Knowi-' celerated by the learned and scientific books which 

edse 

they derived from the Mohammedans. Among 
them were many of the writings of Plato and Aristotle. These 
had been translated from Greek into Arabic and then into Latin. 
In this Latin form they passed into the hands of Europeans, 
on whose minds they had a vigorous, stimulating effect. In 
their quickening effect on the mind of Europe the crusades 
prepared the way for, and hastened, that stirring period which 
we call the Renaissance. 

5. Although in most respects the crusades had a beneficial 
effect on Europe, we must single out the fourth crusade espe- 
cially and point out the evil which it did. For centuries the 
w k d Greek empire had been an effective bulwark against 
the Greek the invasions of the Turks and had kept them 

from gaining a foothold in eastern Europe. For 
this service Europe owed the empire a debt of gratitude. As 
we have seen, the Venetians used the fourth crusade to ruin 
the empire; they took Constantinople and virtually all the em- 
pire that lay in Europe, together with the islands, and in the 
place of the emperor they put a western man. For more than 
fifty years the Greeks fought these invaders and eventually 
(1261) drove them out and recovered their empire. But no 
breathing space was given them to regain their lost strength 
and prosperity, for they had to face their old enemy, the Turks, 
who were relentlessly pressing on to the west. Weakened as 
the Greeks were with their long struggle with the crusaders, 
they nevertheless made a brave resistance. They were unable, 
however, to withstand the persistent attacks of the Turks, 



THE CRUSADES 307 

who took possession, one by one, of the provinces of the empire. 
Finally they laid siege to Constantinople, the capital of the 
empire and its last stronghold, and with its surrender (1453) 
the Greek empire came to an end. Since then the Turks have 
had a large empire in Europe, which has been a blight and a 
curse to the Christians under their rule. And for this misfor- 
tune the fourth crusade and the Venetians are no doubt largely 
responsible because they so thoroughly weakened the defensive 
power of the Greek empire. 



CHAPTER XVI 
THE GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 

The empire of Charlemagne was in a sense the continuation 
of the Roman empire. It was an attempt to perpetuate the 
"imperial" ideal of government — the organization of the civi- 
lized world in one great state, with a single head, 
National Idea. ^ common law, and a government maintaining 
peace and order throughout its whole extent. This 
attempt of Charlemagne to revive the Roman empire failed, 
and his empire broke up into large sections, corresponding 
roughly to geographical and racial divisions. From these and 
from the territories outside of Charlemagne's empire, such as 
Spain and England, were to develop, during the long centuries 
of the Middle Age, the separate nations of Europe. The future 
of the political history of Europe was bound up with the prin- 
ciple of nationality, although it w^as a long time before that 
principle was to emerge clear-cut from the confusion of feudal 
conditions. The idea of the Roman empire survived as a vision 
to haunt the dreams of the German successors of Charlemagne, 
such as Otto the Great and Frederick Barbarossa, and of great 
conquerors hke Napoleon, but it was never to be realized again. 
A common racial element in the population and the occu- 
pation of a distinct geographical division — these are the latent 
or potential forces in the creation of a nation. The active force 
Develo ment ^^ ^^^ growth of a single central government; in 
of National the nations of western Europe the growth of national 
life and national feeling has depended very directly 
upon the growth of the national government. Such national 
governments, however, did not spring full-grown into being 
on the disappearance of the imperial system. During three 
centuries after the collapse of the Carolingian empire (roughly 
900 to 1200) the prevailing political system was feudalism, 

308 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 309 

and the prevalence of feudalism meant the absence of any effec- 
tive public government. 

Applying these general considerations to our problem of 
tracing the development of the French nation, it is apparent 
that we must consider (i) the natural elements of nationality 
in race and geography; (2) the feudal organization of France; 
(3) the growth of the French national monarchy. 

One of the large divisions of Charlemagne's empire was the 
West Frankish territory, comprising most of old Roman Gaul. 
This was the portion of Charles the Bald in the division of 843. 
Origin of As a separate state it came to be known as France. 

ranee. ^j^^ century after the treaty of Verdun was the 
R., I, 91. period of the decline of Carolingian government 
and the growth of that feudal society which we studied in a 
preceding chapter. Near the end of the tenth century (987) 
the direct Carolingian line came to an end in France, and the 
great nobles, into whose hands the actual power had passed, 
chose as their overlord Hugh Capet, count of Paris and duke 
of Francia, whom we may reckon the first feudal king of France 
and the founder of the national line of French monarchs. As 
a matter of fact, the change of dynasty was not a 
Origin of the revolutionary event; the later Carolingians were 
Fr^nch^ 2,s much "Frenchmen" as Hugh Capet, and their 

Monarchy. power, like his, depended upon the support of the 
great lords. Since, however, he was the founder 
of a long line of kings under whom the French nation came into 
being, we may take the accession of Hugh as the beginning of 
French national history. His ancestors for more than a cen- 
tury had been hereditary counts of Paris and lords of a con- 
siderable territory in northern France. He belonged, there- 
fore, to that class of feudal princes the formation of which we 
studied in the chapter on feudalism. 

Geographically France formed a fairly distinct division. The 
ocean, the Pyrenees, and the Mediterranean bounded three 
sides. The eastern frontier had no natural barrier to serve as 
a boundary; at its northern end the political frontier, which 
ran along the western side of the Rhine valley, corresponded 



3IO EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

pretty closely, however, to the line between the Germanic and 
the Latin population. The absence of an effective barrier and 

the natural rivalry of the two races has made this 
of°France^^ region a cause of dispute between the French and 

German nations from that time to the present day. 
On the southern end of the eastern frontier France was cut 
off from the natural boundary of the Alps by the kingdom of 
Burgundy, occupying the valley of the Rh6ne River; this was 
destined eventually to become part of France. 

The most general fact about the French is that they are a 
Latin people. By the fifth century the Gauls had become com- 
pletely Romanized; the Germanic tribes which settled in 
The French southem Gaul, the West Goths and Burgundians, 

a "Latin" had been pretty thoroughly absorbed in the Roman- 
People. ., ,., i,ri 

Lzed population by the end of the tenth century; 
in a less degree this was true also of the Franks as far north as 
the political boundary of France. An external evidence of this 
is the fact that the language spoken in France in medieval 
and modern times is derived directly from the popular Latin 
spoken by the inhabitants of Gaul when it was part of the Roman 
empire.* The French are a Latin people in more than their 
language, however; deep-seated habits of social and intellectual 
life appear in their later history which were evidently acquired 
during the centuries of Roman rule, and which the Germanic 
invasions only disturbed and did not uproot. 

At the end of the tenth century France was far from con- 
stituting a nation politically, since there was no effective 
central government. Local government was in the hands not 
F d 1 c ^^ public officials but of private landlords who con- 
dition of trolled the serfs and peasants living on their lands. 

Frsirxcc 

The powerful nobles, intrenched in their castles, 
were in the main a law unto themselves. The only authority 
they recognized was the personal authority of the greater lord 
to whom they owed allegiance. During the tenth century, in 
France as elsewhere, the feudal organization had progressed 

*This point is developed further in the chapter on "Medieval 
Civilization." 



Note to Map XII. — This map shows the formation of the feudal prin- 
cipalities of France in the tenth century, when the power of the Carolingian 
kings had virtually disappeared. In each of the large divisions of the West 
Prankish kingdom, the actual direction of affairs had passed into the hands 
of the duke, the overlord of the counts and nobles of the region (see p. 309). 
The counts of Paris had become dukes of Francia, which included most of 
northern France. In 987, Hugh "Capet," duke of Francia, was recognized 
as king of France; his duchy of Francia, however, was reduced in size b}^ 
the creation out of it of independent feudal principalities, such as the county 
of Flanders, the county of Champagne (with Chartres and Blois), and the 
county of Anjou (with Maine and Tourainc). Thus the royal lands con- 
trolled directly by the Capetian kings were limited to the "Isle of France" 
as shown on Map XIII. Similarly the county of Toulouse later split off 
from the great duchy of Aquitaine and became one of the separate feudal 
principalities; it absorbed eventually the duchy of Septimania or Gothia. 
The county of Barcelona represents the old Spanish mark; for a time it 
was reckoned as a part of France and its count did homage to the king of 
France. Lying beyond the Pyrenees, however, its destiny was naturally 
connected with the history of the Spanish peninsula; it was to expand and 
become the kingdom of Aragon, one of the important parts of the Spanish 
state. 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 311 

so far as to produce the great feudal princes, lords of whole 
provinces. Since the power of these princes was to be the chief 
obstacle to the growth of royal power, we must notice their 
position. 

Let us consider first the geographical location of these prin- 
cipalities. In the extreme north of France was the county of 
Flanders, corresponding pretty closely to modern Belgium. 
Feudal Prin- South of Flanders was the duchy of Normandy, 
palities. occupying the lower valley of the Seine River. The 

Flanders. line of dukes of Normandy had its origin in the 
orman y. gj-^j^l- Qf ^j^jg province by one of the late Carolingian 
kings to the leader of a band of marauding Northmen, on the 
condition that he and his followers hold the territory against 
other Northmen, for the protection of Paris. These North- 
men, living in the midst of a French population, rapidly as- 
similated French ways and became a part of the French people. 
Southwest of Normandy lay the peninsula of Brit- 
tany, occupied by a Celtic population that had 
never been thoroughly Romanized, and that long retained their 
Celtic speech and characteristics. The duke of Brittany, while 
a vassal of the king of France, had also something of the posi- 
tion of tribal ruler of a separate little nation. South of Nor- 
, . mandy, between the Seine and the Loire Rivers, 

Anjou, •" . . ' 

Francia was the county of Anjou, the counts of which were 

Champagne, ' lords of a large district including Maine and Touraine 
Toufause' as Well as Anjou. In the centre of northern France 
Aquitaine, about Paris was the duchy of Francia, which had 

Gascony. r -r. • tt i >-i 

grown out of the county of Pans. Hugh Capet was 
duke of Francia when he was chosen king of France, so that 
this principality became the crown land; since it was the only 
territory over which the kings of France in the early period 
exercised any effective control, it was the real basis of royal 
power. To the east of Paris lay the county of Champagne; 
south of Champagne the duchy of Burgundy. The south of 
France was divided between three great feudal territories. In 
the southeast the counts of Toulouse had made themselves over- 
lords of a large principality. South of the Loire the great duchy 



312 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of Aquitaine extended to the Garonne River. In the triangle 
made by the Garonne and the Pyrenees lay the duchy of Gas- 
cony; in the eleventh century this was absorbed in the duchy 
of Aquitaine, which then included all of southwestern France. 

The lords of these principalities — dukes of Normandy, Brit- 
tany, Burgundy, Aquitaine, counts of Flanders, Anjou, Cham- 
pagne, Toulouse — were virtually independent of any superior 
p . . , authority. To be sure, they were vassals of the 
the Feudal king of France, from whom they held their lands 

Princes 

and powers and to whom they did homage, but 
the authority of the king was a personal one and did not give 
him the right to control the lands and subjects of his great vas- 
sals. The authority of these great lords over their own provinces 
was limited, of course, by the independent power of their own 
vassals, lesser counts and barons; allowing for this, however, 
we may say that they exercised whatever of sovereign powers 
had survived the disintegration of public government which 
followed the decline of the Carolingian empire. It is certain, 
in any event, that their sovereign powers were not restricted 
by any effective control from above. From this point of view, 
France was a loose confederation of princes owing personal 
allegiance to a nominal overlord, the king. 

This situation explains the weakness of royalty in the feudal 
age. The king of France had the powers of a feudal lord over 
his own domain, the crown land, but over the rest of France 
he possessed none of the attributes of a real ruler, 
tionof the There was no system of public taxes; the old taxes 
FeudarAge ^^ Carolingian and Roman times had been trans- 
formed into rents and dues paid to local lords. The 
king, therefore, had only the resources common to the other 
great lords, that is, the rents from the serfs in Ms own villages 
and the customary feudal dues paid by his own vassals. There 
was no national army raised and commanded by the king; he 
had only the services of his own private retainers and the mili- 
tary obligations of his vassals to rely upon for this purpose, and 
any one of the great feudal princes was about as powerful in 
a military way as the king. There was no administrative sys- 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 313 

tem centralized in the king; that is, he had no body of officials 
whom he could send out to govern parts of the country in his 
name; for local government was either exercised by the local 
landlord over his tenants in the manors or maintained by the 
greater lords for their provinces. Each one of the greater lords 
exercised sovereign powers (rights of justice, coinage, and con- 
trol of roads) within his own fief, and therefore these powers 
were exercised by the king only on the crown land. 

This, however, is not the whole story. There was latent in 
the position of the king a superior authority which was cer- 
tain to emerge as society progressed in order and organization. 
Non Feudal ^^^^ ^^ the early feudal age the king had a sanc- 
Eiementsin tity which distinguished him from the counts and 

the Monarchy. . r ^ ^ • i i tx 

dukes, no matter how powerful they might be. He 
was regarded in a vague way as the head of his people, responsible 
to God for their welfare — as the ^'fountain of justice," the pro- 
tector of the poor, and the defender of the church. This notion 
of kingship was an inheritance from Charlemagne's empire, and 
it was cultivated in the French monarchy especially by the 
clergy. It was expressed in the anointing and consecration of 
the king at the time of his coronation. Later on we shall find 
the monarchy appealing to a still older tradition of sovereignty, 
in the revived study of Roman law, in which the supremacy of 
the central government over the w^hole state is an essential 
feature. StiU later the natural tendency of the country to rally 
to the central government, once that government had proven 
itseK strong enough to enforce law and order, was to produce 
the conception of the king as the embodiment of French 
national interests and feeling. 

The reahzation of all this, however, was far in the future. 
At the time of Hugh Capet, the monarchy gave Httle evidence 
Louis the Fat ^^ becoming the rallying point of national life. And 
"08-1137 the first ioui kings (Hugh Capet, Robert, Henry I, 
Crown Land and Philip I) did little more than make the crown 

strictly hereditary in the Capetian line. Louis VI 
(Louis the Fat, 1108-1137) spent his active life in making 
himself master of the crown land. To do this he had to wage 



314 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

continual war on the turbulent barons who had erected their 
great stone towers in the country around Paris. They were 
J. J direct vassals of the king, but they held the royal 

power in light esteem; from these strongholds they 
menaced the roads which led from one royal town to an- 
other, as from Paris to Orleans; they held up convoys of 
merchants, browbeat peasants and monks, and waged their 
own private wars with insolent disregard of their royal over- 
lord. Louis VI set his hand to the necessary but troublesome 
task of reducing them to obedience. Time after time he led 
his little army of retainers against their castles and took them 
by siege or assault, hazarding with delight his own person in 
the fray. It was a purely local policy and on a small scale com- 
pared with the whole territory of France of which he was 
nominally king, but it laid the real foundations for the future 
greatness of the Capetian monarchy. Henceforth the king was 
master on his own domain, and could undertake the larger task 
of making himself respected by the greater feudal princes. 

His son, Louis VII (1137-1180), did little to advance the 
royal power. He went on the second crusade, thus neglect- 
ing his immediate task in France and wasting needed resources 

in men and money. Before his accession his father 
1137-1180; had arranged a politic marriage for him with Elea- 
PoiiSr^^ nor, heiress of the great duchy of Aquitaine; this 

was a step towara the acquisition of that fief for 
the crown. It would have meant also a great advance in the 
extension of royal influence into the south of France. Louis 
Divorce of ^^^^ howcvcr, after he came back from the crusade, 
Eleanor of secured a divorce from Eleanor. This was prob- 

Aquitaine; , . . , . 

Its Conse- ably justified by her light conduct, but it was an 
quences. unfortunate act politically. Not only did he lose 
the opportunity of adding Aquitaine to the crown lands; what 
made it worse was that Eleanor then married the young count of 
Anjou, who was to become Henry II of England. This marriage 
brought Aquitaine, along with Normandy and Anjou, under the 
control of a foreign monarch, and was the source of great diffi- 
culty for later French kings. 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 315 

At the end of the twelfth century, with the accession of 

PhiHp Augustus (PhiHp IT, 11 80-1 2 23), the monarchy entered 

upon a period of rapid growth, the character of which we must 

study. The lines of growth were conditioned by 

Augustus, the feudal state of society. The monarchs had 

1223. ^^^^ ^^ increase their actual power and resources 

Growth of the |3y increasing the extent of the royal land; this 

they did by absorbing into the crown land one after 

another of the great fiefs held by the feudal princes. The royal 

authority having by this means been made more effective, it 

was possible for the king to develop a machinery of government 

centering in his court and carried out by his agents; this in time 

became a real national public government for all of France. 

The first great increase in the extent of the crown land was 

made when Philip Augustus seized some of the French lands held 

by the kings of England. From the time when William, duke of 

Normandy, in 1066, won the English crown, the 

First Increase kmgs of England had held Normandy as a family 

in Crown °. T-i ^ i - r -ry 

Lands. possession, domg homage to the kmg of France for 

Origin of it. Henry II, who became king of England in 1 1 54, 
English j^gj(j other fiefs in France in addition to Normandy, 

in France. which Came to him, along with the English crown, 
through his mother, a granddaughter of the Con- 
queror. He was the son of the count of Anjou, and had married 
the heiress of the great duchy of Aquitaine. Thus he was lord 
of three great French territories — Normandy, Anjou, and Aqui- 
taine — which together constituted over half of France; and 
while, of course, he did homage to the king of France for these, 
the possession of them made him a formidable rival to the French 
monarch. 

During the first part of his long reign Philip Augustus de- 
voted his efforts to the task of breaking this dangerous power. 
This involved him in constant intrigues and struggles against 
Philips the English kings, Henry II, Richard Lionheart, and 

Intrigues. John. Philip was not troubled by scruples in this 
undertaking. He first conspired with the sons of Henry II in 
their revolts against their father. Henry II had invested three 



3i6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of his sons with the French fiefs of Normandy, Brittany, and 
Aquitaine. One after another they rose in rebelHon against him, 
Against encouraged and aided in every case by PhiHp. After 

Henry II. the death of Henry II, Philip intrigued against 
Against Henry's son, Richard I, his former ally. His op- 

portunity came at the time of the third crusade. 
Richard and Philip had taken the vow and gone on the crusade 
together; Philip, however, suddenly abandoned the enter- 
prise, returned to France, and began intriguing with Richard's 
brother John. Richard on his way back from the crusade was 
taken prisoner and held for ransom by his enemy, the emperor 
Henry VI. Philip and John tried to induce the emperor to 
keep him in captivity or to hand him over to them. Richard, 
however, was released by the emperor on payment of a heavy 
ransom, and returned to England to bring his brother to terms; 
he then undertook a war against Philip in France in the midst 
of which he died, in 1199. John succeeded as king 

11 nr o 1 r\ C^ 

John. of England, and Philip immediately turned against 

R I 04a ^^^" -^^ ^^^^ espoused the cause of John's nephew, 

Arthur of Brittany, who laid claim to the English 
throne. Arthur, however, fell into his uncle's hands and was put 
out of the way. In the meantime, Philip had summoned John 
as his vassal to appear before the royal court to answer (Charges 

brought against him by his enemies. On John's 

i iiilin i^3,lcp^ 

Most of the failure to appear the French court declared his fiefs 
^omiohn^^^ forfeited, and Philip proceeded to conquer them. 
John made no serious effort to defend his possessions, 
and PhiHp took Normandy, Anjou, and part of the duchy of 
Aquitaine, and added them to the crown lands. 

These acquisitions more than doubled the extent of the royal 
r?a: 4. 4.1, lands and the actual resources of the monarch. It 

Eflfect on the 

Position of the raised him in actual strength far above any of the 
feudal princes. Henceforth the king was able to 
take a higher tone in dealing with his vassals, and was able 
to compel them to recognize his authority. 

This was only the first in a series of additions to tne crown 
land by the inheritance or confiscation of the fiefs of the great 




Boundary of France 
- Eitent of lands held bj 

Henry II of England 

and bis sons. 
3 Crown lands at accession 

of Philip Augustus 
1 Additions to crown lands ^ 

made by Philip Augustus^ /%(vy*'^ 

O, Lands confiscated 

from King John 

of England. 

O Lands acquired by 
Philip's marri^e. 

L.L.POATSS CO., N.Y. 



Longitude 



West 



Longitude East 



i Greenwich 



Note to Map XIII. — This map shows (i) the extent of lands held as fiefs 
by the Angevin kings of England (Henry II and his sons) before the con- 
fiscations which Philip Augustus made from John of England; (2) the 
extent of the crown lands at the accession of Philip Augustus; (3) the 
increase in the crown lands made by Philip (a), the lands confiscated from 
John (b), the counties of Artois and Vermandois acquired by PhiHp through 
his marriage with the daughter of the count of Flanders. The rest of 
France consisted of fiefs held by direct vassals of the king of France. Most 
of these were to fall one by one into the possession of the crown; Toulouse 
in 1272, Champagne in 1285, Burgundy in 1361, Guienne as the result 
of the Hundred Years' War, etc. On the other hand, the crown land was 
reduced in extent later by the grants of fiefs to younger sons of the royal 
line, who established new lines of feudal princes (see p. 322). 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 317 

lords; we shall notice the, others in the order of their occur- 
rence. In Philip's reign the first step was taken in the process 
Other Addi- ^hich was to bring into the crown land the impor- 
tions to the tant county of Toulouse. This was the " Albigensian 
crusade," inspired by Pope Innocent III against 
the count of Toulouse because of his support of the Albigensian 
heretics. Its political importance lay in the fact that the count 
of Toulouse was later able to make his peace only by ceding 
part of the county to the king of France and by agreeing to a 
marriage of his daughter with a member of the royal line, as a 
result of which eventually the whole county fell to the crown. 

From Philip's reign dates also the first important advance 
in the development of a royal administration, both central and 
local. The central government grew out of the king's court. 
Growth of '^^^^ court comprised occasional assemblies of the 
Royal great lords, who as vassals of the king came at his 

Gcvernment. ° ... ^ 

summons to give him advice or to act as a feudal 
court of justice. Its permanent element, however, 
was made up of the retainers and the officials and servants of 
the king. It conducted its business wherever the king might be 
staying — at Paris, at Orleans, or at any of the numerous castles 
which the king owned on the royal domain; there was, there- 
fore, no fijxed capital of the kingdom. The business which came 
before this court in the early period of the monarchy was more 
private than public; that is, it had to do with the management 
of the king's household, the administration of his private estates 
and the revenues derived from them, and the control of his own 
vassals and retainers. 

In the time of Philip Augustus this court took on more of 
the character of a central government for France. The in- 
creased power of the king caused even the greater nobles to 
respect his summons and to recognize his authority. A body 
of officials, forming a class that found its interest in working 
for the king, developed around him, and the larger affairs that 
came under their control gave them something of the char- 
acter of public officials rather than private servants. 

The local government instituted by the king was at first, of 



3i8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

course, confined to the royal land. The royal domain, or 
crown land, was composed of small fiefs held by local nobles as 

direct vassals of the king, and of villages (manors) 

under his immediate control. Louis VI had re- 
Balnb^^^^ duced the nobles on the crown land to obedience 

to the monarch, after which they became for the 
most part stanch supporters of the monarchy and furnished 
many members of the growing class of royal officials at the court. 
The royal villages were the most immediate source of the king's 
revenue in the feudal age; they were managed for him by local 
agents (prevots), who collected the rents and dues from the peas- 
ants and administered justice to the inhabitants in the village 
courts. The prevots were difficult to control, since they held 
their offices as hereditary charges and paid themselves out of 
the revenues which they collected. In order to improve the 
oversight over them, Philip divided the crown land into dis- 
tricts and appointed over each district an official, known as 
bailli, whose duty it was to watch the administration of the 
prevots of his district and hold them to stricter account. The 
baillis held courts in their districts, and were given authority 
over the lesser nobles as well as over the prevots. Drawn from 
the class of royal officials devoted to the king's service and his 
interests, their administration made a beginning of centralized 
government in the hands of the king, which was extended in 
scope with the growth of the crown lands. 

By this time also there had been accomplished a noticeable 
advance in national feeling and national life. The isolation 
and independence which had kept the provinces separated 

from one another were breaking down before the 

Growth of . . 11.1 

National general mcrease m intercourse and advance m order 
^^^^^' and civilization. The qrusades had brought to- 

la Noble gether nobles from all parts of France, and in the 
second and third crusades they had followed the 
French king. The Albigensian crusade had caused the ruin 
of the culture in the south of France, and, while this was a sad 
loss, it lessened the divergence between north and south and 
hastened the extension of a single French culture. A type of 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 319 

literature had developed in the north which reflected the ideals 
and interests of the noble class and which acquired something 
of the vogue of a national literature. The form of Old French 
spoken in and about Paris came to be accepted as the standard 
literary form, an important step in the formation of a single 
national language. 

This tendency toward unity affected not only the noble 
class. With the increase of commerce and industry and the 
growth of cities in the twelfth century, a middle class between 
noble and serf came into existence, composed of 
chant^claYs" rnerchants, traders, and professional men. Com- 
merce and trade required good and safe roads, and 
a simpler system of tolls and coinage. At first the cities had to 
make such arrangements for safe intercourse as they could, 
often at the cost of actual war with the nobles and robber 
barons. In the twelfth century, however, the king and the 
great nobles recognized the advantage of having wealthy and 
prosperous towns on their lands, and encouraged the holding of 
fairs and gave charters to the cities, securing them rights of 
self-government and protection and freedom of trade. This 
furthered the intercourse of city with city and accelerated the 
amalgamation of the diverse local elements into a single French 
people. 

This advance must not be exaggerated, however. The earlier 
elements of disunity had not vanished. The great princes 
still ruled their provinces without any serious interference 
from the royal government. The barons were still a warlike 
and independent class. The mass of the population was still 
subject mainly to the control of their local landlords. The 
roads were still unsafe, and private wars were still frequent. 
These conditions, however, were passing; the future was with 
the growth of the central power of the king and the disappear- 
ance of feudal anarchy. 

The fact that the monarchy was not yet beyond the period 
of struggle was made apparent in the next generation. Philip 
Augustus was succeeded by his son, Louis VIII, who reigned 
only three years (12 23-1 2 26) and left a young son of eleven years 



320 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

to succeed him. This was Louis IX, the greatest and best of 
the mediaeval kings of France. During his minority his mother, 
Louis IX Blanche of Castile, acted as regent. The great no- 
(i 226-1270) bles, who had begun to feel the reins of royal power 

Encounters . i 1 • 

Feudal tightenmg upon them, took this opportunity to 

Revolts. revolt. The queen-mother had to face several 

coalitions of nobles. To add to her troubles Henry III of 
England invaded the country in an attempt to recover the 
French lands lost by his father, King John. These difficulties 
still confronted Louis IX when he came of age in 1236. He 
B t G ts the S^^ ^^^ better of them, however; the revolts of the 
Better of nobles Were crushed, and Henry III defeated and 
^^' forced to make peace. In this settlement Louis IX 

recognized the title of Henry III to Guienne, the central part 
of the old duchy of Aquitaine, which Henry was to hold as a 
fief of the French crown; Henry, on his side, abandoned his 
claim to the rest of the lands once held by the kings of England 
in France. 

The progress of royal power was very rapid under this wise 
and good king. He brought the rebellious count of Toulouse to 
terms, making him cede half of the county to the crown, and 

arranging the marriage between the daughter ^f the 
Royaf Power count and the brother of the king whereby the rest 
Louis IX ^^ ^^^ county later reverted to the crown. A notable 

improvement was made in the central government. 
The officials at the king's court were organized into separate and 
permanent bodies for the management of different kinds of 

business. The judicial affairs which came before 
^ntT' the king had greatly increased in number and rni- 
GoverTme^nt po^tance. For this very important business Louis 

IX created a special judicial body, made up of 
lawyers and judges; this was known as the parlement. The 
financial interests of the monarchy were intrusted to a special 
branch of the royal court, called the chambre des comptes 
(chamber of accounts). This body received and kept record 
of the revenues coming from the different sources of royal in- 
come. A third body comprised the official advisers of the king, 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 321 

who aided him in matters of general policy and administra- 
tion; it bore the name of the grand conseil (great council). 
These departments were given permanent quarters in Paris, 
which thus became the capital of France. 

Louis IX was not only the greatest of the mediaeval kings of 
France ; he was also one of the finest and most attractive figures 
of the Middle Age. We have an intimate picture of him in the 

memoirs of the Sire de Joinville, his faithful and de- 
of SLToms. voted follower, who spent the active part of his life 

in attendance upon him. Joinville's examples are 
Memoirs. chosen mainly to illustrate the virtues of St. Louis, 
R., I, 95. his piety, gentleness, modesty, and sense of justice. 

We get from this the impression of a man too vir- 
tuous to be a strong ruler; this must be corrected from what we 
know of his public acts. He put down the revolts of the nobles 
with a strong hand, and drove Henry III out of the kingdom. 
He strengthened the royal government and compelled obedience 
to it. He was reproached for not confiscating all the lands of 
Henry III after defeating him, but the peace which he made 
was a fair and sensible one. In spite of his piety and asceticism, 
which seemed excessive to the nobles of the time, he had the 
virtues of a knight: bravery, strength, and skill in arms. Nor 
was he subservient to the church; he knew how to keep the 
French clergy from encroaching on royal powers, and he re- 
fused to aid the pope in the struggle against the emperor, 
Frederick II.* ( His devotion, however, did lead him into the 
mistaken policy of trying to revive the crusades; in the middle 
of his reign he led an expedition to Egypt and Palestine, which 
kept him out of France for six years, and he met his death 
on another futile crusade against the Mohammedan power in 
Tunis, in northern Africa (1270). A generation after his death 
the church recognized his merits by declaring him a saint 
(1297), and he is known among the French kings as St. Louis. 

* He did, however, allow his younger brother, Charles of Anjou, to 
accept the crown of Sicily from the pope, in the latter's effort to oust 
the Hohenstaufen family. This was the beginning of French inter- 
vention in Italian affairs, which was to be very costly to France. 



322 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

After the death of Louis IX the French monarchy continued 
to increase in strength and organization until the outbreak of 
the Hundred Years' War with England, which interrupted the 
growth. This period is covered by the reigns of Philip III, 
Philip IV, and the three sons of Philip IV (Louis X, Philip V, 
Charles IV). The crown lands were increased by the acquisition 
of the rest of the county of Toulouse and of the county of Cham- 
pagne, which Philip IV acquired by marrying the heiress. For 
a time he had his hands also on the county of Flanders, but 
later restored it to the count. 

At this point we must notice a practice adopted by the kings 
which had the effect of undoing to a certain extent this work of 
enlarging the royal domain. From the time of Louis VIII it 
"Appanages" became usual for the king to grant parts of the 
Granted from domain to vounger sons, in order to endow them 

the Crown i ^ , . . 

Lands to With estates and revenues adequate to their princely 
ounger ons. ^.^^^.^ these Were held as fiefs from the crown. So 
the three younger brothers of Louis IX were made, respectively, 
counts of Anjou, Poitou, and Artois, lands which had been 
added to the crown domain by earlier kings. Louis IX did 
the same for his younger sons, and the practice was continued 
by succeeding kings. These fiefs, called "appanages," reduced 
the amount of land held immediately by the king, and the gen- 
eral result was to create a new feudal aristocracy, sprung, to be 
sure, from the royal line, but tending, like the older feudal 
princes, to seek their own interests and resist the extension of 
royal power. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the 
kings were to have to face revolts and coalitions from this class 
of powerful lords, who could trace their origin to younger sons 
of former kings.* 

An important feature of this period is the development of 
a theory of absolute government. While this was, in a way, the 
Theory of natural result of the growth of royal power, it drew 
Absolutism, -^.g principles directly from Roman law, a knowl- 
edge of which was just becoming general in the thirteenth cen- 
tury. This movement is important and characteristic enough 
* See pp. 391-394 for illustration of this fact. 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 323 

to justify our studying it .for itself. The twelfth century was 
a period of intellectual revival, the essence of which was the 
recovery of a completer knowledge of the culture 
Century of the classical world than had been available to 
^^^^ ■ the early Middle Age. In the schools literature 
was studied from the great Latin writers, such as Vergil, Cicero, 
Terence, and Horace; mathematical studies included the geom- 
etry of Euclid and the astronomy of Ptolemy. The recovery 
of the works of Aristotle not only enabled the church scholars 
to construct a more scientific theology but also to study and 
teach philosophy as a separate science. The results appeared 
in the thirteenth century, in the growth of universities where 
the higher learning could be pursued, and in the growth of that 
complete synthesis of logic, philosophy, and theology which 
we know as the "scholastic system." 

An important feature of this revival was the recovery of a 
knowledge of Roman law in the systematic form which it had 
received in the codification of Justinian (the Corpus iuris civilis, 
R ve of ^^ body of civil law). This body of logical, syste- 
the Code of matic, and withal humane legislation impressed the 
mediaeval lawyers and administrators much as the 
works of Aristotle impressed the mediaeval theologians and phi- 
losophers; they regarded it with reverence, treated it as a final 
Theory of authority in the field, and applied it as far as pos- 
Roman Law. g-j^jg ^^ their own problems. Now, one fundamen- 
tal concept of the Roman law was the supremacy of the 
state; all individuals and all private interests in the empire 
were subject to the will of the state as expressed in the 
public law. By the time of Justinian the authority of the state 
was conceived of as embodied in the person of the emperor, 
not as a capricious despot but as the personification of the 
state and the head of the administrative system through which 
the authority of the state over individuals was carried out. 
The royal lawyers and royal officials (not only in France, but 
in all countries where a national monarchy was developing) 
found, therefore, in the code of Justinian a theory and a body 
of precedents upon which they could draw in trying to assert 



324 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the superiority of the royal authority over the private authority 
of feudal lords or church or communes. 

This theory (which may be stated in the form that sovereign 
powers can be exercised only by the king or by the officials to 
whom he delegates them) had already been applied in the legis- 
lation of Louis IX, but the great age of its use was 
Application the reign of Philip IV (Philip the Fair, 1285-13 14). 
by^heRoyaf ^^ ^as given expression over and over in the royal 
Lawyers. ordinances of this monarch. This did not result 
in the sudden emergence of an absolute govern- 
ment; in fact, the great feudal lords continued for a long time 
to exercise sovereign powers, and the lesser landlords to possess 
private jurisdiction; but the theory of absolutism was given 
definite expression, and a beginning was made in withdrawing 
certain sovereign powers, such as control of coinage and keep- 
ing peace on the highways, from the lords, and putting them in 
the hands of the king. 

To Philip IV is also usually attributed the creation of a new 
organ of the central government which came later to be known 
as the States General, although similar assemblies had been held 
earlier. This was a national representative body. 
Summons the somewhat like the " Model Parliament " of Edward I, 
erar^?so2^ ^^ England. It was composed of representatives of 
the three " estates " or classes, clergy, nobles, and the 
merchant class of the cities. It was called by Philip in 1302, 
when he was in the midst of his quarrel with Pope Boniface VIII, 
because he wished to assure himself of the support of the coun- 
try in that struggle. On later occasions the king sometimes 
submitted his need for money to the States General, because 
authorization by this body would facilitate the collection of 
new taxes. Thus the States General had much the same reason 
for existence as the English Parliament; but, for reasons that 
will appear later, it never acquired the permanent and impor- 
tant position in the government that Parliament did in Eng- 
land. 

The conflict of Philip IV with the pope, Boniface VIII, was 
an illustration of a fact that we shall have frequently to notice 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 325 

— namely, that as soon asr the national monarchy grew strong 
it was bound to enter into a contest with the church, which exer- 
cised such large powers in every country. The de- 
Philip and tails of this contest are told in another chapter,* and 
kce\?ir ^^ need notice here only the general outlines. The 
conflict began over the vital question of taxation. 
Philip IV, like other morarchs, was in the habit of securing 
grants of money from the clergy of his kingdom, which amounted 
to levying taxes on them. Pope Boniface, in the bull Clericis 
Latcos, forbade the practice, and threatened to excommunicate 
rulers who levied taxes on the church and to deprive of their 
offices clergy who paid them. In France the king had the better 
of the contest, and Boniface gave way, virtually admitting the 
right of the king to demand contributions from the clergy of 
FrancCc After the death of Boniface VIII and the brief pontif- 
icate of Benedict XI, Philip IV was able to secure 
at^ Avignon.^ the election of a French prelate to the papacy; the 
new pope, Clement V, moved the papal court from 
Rome to Avignon, on the border of French territory, where it 
remained for seventy years. During this period the papacy was 
completely subservient to French influence. 

France under Philip IV occupied a leading position in Eu- 
rope. The relations between states had not yet taken that 
form of acute rivalry which characterizes the whole course of 
modern history; for no government had as yet 
is sufficiently mastered its own resources to be able 

to engage in an active foreign policy. This sort 
of rivalry was beginning to make its appearance at the end of 
the thirteenth century, however. Philip IV inherited a stand- 
ing quarrel with the king of England, who still held lands in 
France. Philip tried to dispossess Edward I of 
these lands (the duchy of Guienne), and both mon- 
archs sought allies, Philip in the Scotch, who were engaged then 
in a struggle with the English king, and Edward in the count 
of Flanders, who had revolted against the French king. The 
alliance of France and Scotland remained a traditional feature 

* See pp. 404, 405. 



326 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of French foreign policy well into the modern period. The 
struggle between Philip IV and Edward I was ended before it 
came to open war; Philip restored to Edward the duchy of 
Guienne, which he had seized; but this was one of a chain of 
incidents which was to lead, in the generation after Philip IV, 
to the Hundred Years' War between England and France. 

The eastern frontier of France, along its whole length from 
the mouths of the Rhine to the Mediterranean, was bounded 
by the territories of the empire. The principal territories from 
The Empire i^^rth to south were: the Netherland territories of 
and the Hainault, Brabant, Luxemburg, the duchy of Lor- 

Frontier of raine, the free county of Burgundy (Franche Comte), 
Savoy, Dauphine, and Provence. The decline of 
the imperial government after the death of Frederick II, in 1250, 
weakened the ties which bound these outlying territories to the 
empire and they tended to gravitate toward France. Philip IV 
was able to secure the recognition of his overlordship from sev- 
eral of the princes holding lands in this region; this was the 
first step in that advance of the French frontier eastward toward 
the Rhine River and the Alps which was to be one of the most 
important movements of modern history. 

A characteristic feature of French national life which de- 
serves attention is the position attained by the city of Paris 
as the centre of the nation. Paris is the heart and head of France 
to an extent that is not true of any other European 
Mddle^Age. capital. It had not, to be sure, acquired that quality 
within the limits of our period; in fact, it was the 
stirring events of the French revolution and the nineteenth 
century which completed the process. Nevertheless, the early 
stages in the process form an important part of the story. The 
nucleus of the city was the largest of a group of small islands 
^ . . in the Seine River. This, as Caesar tell us, was the 

Origins. 

site of the fortified camp of the Gallic tribe of the 
Parish. It was an important centre for the administration of 
northern Gaul in Roman and Prankish times, but its real im- 
portance in French history dates from the time when the local 
family of lords, the counts of Paris, became the royal line 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 327 

of France with the accession of Hugh Capet. As the kings built 
up a really national government during the twelfth and thir- 
teenth centuries, Paris attracted to itself various ele- 

Growtn. 

ments of population, which settled in ever-expanding 
quarters on both banks of the river up and down the stream 
from the island. To-day the original town is lost in the im- 
mensity of the modern city, but the island still bears a name 
(la Cite) which recalls its ancient importance. 

The process of accretions by which the city grew is so char- 
acteristic of mediaeval life that we can afford to analyze it. 
The most important step was the growth of Paris as a national 

capital through the permanent location there of the 
Capita?. ^^^ organs of royal government. From the beginning 

of the twelfth century Paris was the favorite, and 
in a way the official residence of the kings. The royal palace 
was built on the southern end of the island, and was continually 
enlarged by successive kings. The household of the king with 
the numerous private officials and servants and retainers was 
housed here; here also the king usually held his court, which 
would be attended on important occasions by the great feudal 
lords. The royal court of justice, the parlement, created under 
Louis IX, had its great hall and chambers in a quarter of the 
palace buildings. The department of the treasury (the chamber 
of accounts) was located in another part of the city, on the 
north bank, in the palace of the Templars; for that wealthy 
organization served the king somewhat as a modern national 
bank, and the royal treasurer was usually a member of the 
order. 

In the midst of the palace grounds Louis IX built, soon after 
1240, the exquisite little Gothic church (la Sainte Chapelle), 

which still stands there. This was erected to serve 
Chapelle!" ^ as a shrine for the precious relic, the cross of thorns, 

which the pious king secured from Baldwin, em- 
peror of Constantinople. By great good fortune the chapel has 
escaped the ravages of time and revolutions, to be preserved 
for us as one of the most perfect examples of Gothic architec- 
ture. 



328 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Paris also contained that element which in most towns of 
the Middle Age was the chief cause of growth, the merchant 
class. The city, however, was too much of a royal town to be- 
come a self-governing commune, and during the 
S^Paris^^'^^ mediaeval period the chief official was the royal 
prevot, who governed in the name of the king. In 
fact, the city government was a curious medley of jurisdic- 
tions, owing to the fact that various corporations were exempted 
by special charter or customary privilege from the authority 
of the royal prevot. Ecclesiastical jurisdictions included not 
only that of the bishop of Paris, whose cathedral church was 
Notre Dame, but also many abbeys and convents. After the 
completion of its organization the university of Paris pos- 
sessed jurisdiction over the students and masters which com- 
posed it. Among these jurisdictions must be reckoned the 
limited rights of self-government granted to the merchants. 
The bourgeois (citizens) had their own organiza- 
Merchants.^ tion, with a ''prevot of the merchants" at its head. 
This organization had its own courts and customary 
law. The region of the merchants was on the north bank, east 
of the island, a region still marked by the present Hotel de 
Ville, or city hall. In the troubled times of the Hundred Years' 
War the bourgeois, acting through the prevot of the mer- 
chants, were to exercise considerable influence on the course 
of events. 

The ecclesiastical element in the growth of Paris was very 
considerable. Paris had its patron saints, more or less legendary, 
of whom the chief were St. Denis (Dionysius), missionary and 
^, , , martyr about 2^0, and Ste. Genevieve, who saved 

Chvirchesana . 

Abbeys of the city from Attila and his Huns. The abbey and 
church of St. Denis were held in special reverence 
by the kings of France; the royal standard in the Middle Age 
was the "oriflamme" (pennant) of St. Denis, and the kings 
were buried in the abbey church. Paris was the seat of a bishop, 
whose cathedral church was located at the northern end of the 
island. In the late twelfth and thirteenth century a splendid 
Gothic cathedral was erected in place of the older church, and 



GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 329 

dedicated to Notre Dame.* In addition to the cathedral and 
the parish churches, there were many rich monasteries located 
in Paris, which also built fine churches. In the middle of the 
twelfth century the Templars were granted a tract of land by 
the king and built their great castle, which was known as the 
Temple. One of the most famous trials of the Middle Age was 
the trial instituted by Philip IV against this order, which re- 
sulted in its dissolution and the confiscation of its wealth. In 
the thirteenth century both Dominican and Franciscan friars 
established convents and schools in Paris. 

There were many schools in Paris, maintained at the cathe- 
dral and in the larger monasteries, and these schools played a 
very important part in the twelfth-century revival. In the 

first part of the twelfth century Abelard, the fore- 
of^Paris! ^ runner of the great philosophers and theologians 

of the thirteenth century, studied at the cathedral 
school of Notre Dame and the school of the abbey of Ste. Gene- 
vieve, and at the latter school began his lectures on theology 
in which he drew to an unprecedented extent upon the logic 
and philosophy of Aristotle, just then being introduced in full 
to western Europe. The university of Paris had its origin in 
the cathedral school in the cloisters of Notre Dame; it soon 
outgrew these quartets and was transferred to the south bank 
of the river. From the river south to the church of Ste. Gene- 
vieve, now the Pantheon, were built in the thirteenth and suc- 
ceeding centuries the various schools and colleges, supported 
by the pious legacies of kings and wealthy men, which were 
incorporated into the university of Paris. The region of the 
schools bore (and still bears) the name of the Latin Quarter. 
Like all great universities it offered advanced instruction in 
the higher courses: the liberal arts, theology, philosophy, law, 
and medicine; but its pre-eminence in Europe rested especially 
upon the courses in theology and philosophy. In fact, the uni- 
versity of Paris took the lead in that movement which repre- 

* The special reverence for the Virgin Mary, which flourished in the 
thirteenth century, led to the rededication of many cathedrals to her 
under the title of "Our Lady." 



330 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

sents the highest intellectual achievement of the Middle Age, 
the formation of the scholastic system, which attempted to 
make a complete system of theology on the basis of the logical 
method and metaphysical principles of Aristotle. 



CHAPTER XVII 
THE ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION 

In the chapter on France we discussed the general question 
of the origin of nationahty and noted the fundamental im- 
portance of that development for the history of Europe. In 
this and the following chapter on England our 
EnSish° ^ attention will be occupied mainly with the develop- 
ment of the English nation, and especially with the 
principal active factor in that development, the national govern- 
ment. For the beginning of this nation, however, we have to 
start farther back than in the case of France. The important 
mediaeval nations on the continent grew out of the fragments 
of the empire of Charlemagne; the English people never formed 
a part of that empire, and their history runs back without a 
break to the coming of the original tribes of Angles and Saxons 
to Roman Britain. In contrast to the Franks, Burgundians, 
Lombards, and other German tribes that settled in Gaul or 
Italy and came under Roman influence, the Angles and Saxons 
continued in the new abode their native life, speaking their 
German dialects, worshipping their old gods, and keeping up 
their tribal organization. Although Britain had been part of 
the Roman empire for more than three centuries, the British 
inhabitants had never been Romanized in anything like the 
degree that the Gauls had been. This is shown by the fact that 
the descendants of the British, the Welsh, speak a Celtic lan- 
guage; the old Britons had apparently never adopted Latin 
as their popular speech. The Angles and Saxons, therefore, 
did not come into contact with Roman influences to any great 
extent when they settled in Britain. Certainly there is little 
evidence of Roman institutions and ideas in their early history. 

During the fourth century, while Britain was still a part of 

331 



332 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the Roman empire, the eastern shores of the island were oc- 
casionally raided by bands of sea-robbers, whom the Romans 

called Saxons. At the end of that century (about 
thSnvasfons. 4^^) the Roman military forces were withdrawn 

from the island to defend the frontiers of the Rhine 
and Danube. The native Britons, long accustomed to depend- 
ing on the Roman government for protection, were powerless 
to defend themselves. The raids became more frequent and 
the invaders established permanent footholds on the coast. 
Then whole tribes, with women and children, migrated to occupy 
the land thus won. By 500 most of the eastern and southern 
coast was in the hands of the newcomers; step by step they 
pushed inland, until by 600 they had won most of what is now 
England. The Britons, retreating before the invaders, were 
crowded back into the western part of the island, the peninsula 
of Cornwall and the mountainous region of Wales; here they 
held out, jealously guarding their own language and their Chris- 
tian faith, and having as little intercourse as possible with their 
conquerors. 

The invaders were Angles, Saxons, and a few Jutes, coming 

from their homeland in northern Germany and the 

The 

Invaders. Danish peninsula. The Angles occupied most of 
the eastern shore, north of the Thames River; the 
Saxons settled in the Thames valley, and all the region south 
as far west as Cornwall. The southeastern peninsula, known 
as Kent, was occupied by the Jutes. 

While they were engaged in the process of conquering the 
land the invaders had undergone a change that marked a de- 
cided advance in political organization. They had come to 
^ ,. t the island in many small tribes each under its own 

Formation of -^ 

the English chief, but the need of combining to win the terri- 
tory had brought about the formation of larger 
units. By the beginning of the seventh century we find them 
organized into a number of territorial kingdoms : Wessex, Essex, 
Sussex, Kent, East Anglia, Mercia, and Northumbria. These 
names are geographical for the most part; Wessex, Sussex, and 
Essex are the kingdoms of the west, south and east Saxons; 



ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION 333 

East Anglia the kingdom, of the eastern Angles; Mercia, the 
"mark" or frontier kingdom; Northumbria the kingdom north 
of the Humber River. 

Some of the tribal laws of these kingdoms, written down in 
the seventh and eighth centuries,* have been preserved to our 
own day, and they reveal to us the state of society among these 
early Enghshmen. Each kingdom had its own tribal 
OrgaiSzation. ^^.w and its own king. The kingdoms were divided 
into political divisions, called shires in Wessex; 
these divisions probably represent in most cases the original 
small tribes which united to form the larger territorial king- 
doms. The shires, which correspond to the Frankish counties, 
were, like them, divided into hundreds. The free political life 
of tribal times was continued in the assemblies of all the free- 
men in the hundred-court and the shire-court, meeting under 
elected leaders. The government, of course, was very simple 
and primitive.! 

The first steps in English history had been taken, therefore, 
by 600: the invasion, conquest, and settlement of the territory, 
and the organization of social and political institutions in the 
rr 1 new land. The next two centuries, 600 to 800, 

Tendency ^ ' ' 

toward were to see the beginnings of important movements 

for the later history of the English. One of these 
was a tendency toward unification of all the English people 
into one state. One after another of the warlike kings sought 
to make himself supreme over his neighboring kings. About 
600 Ethelbert of Kent is said to have been overlord of all the 
kingdoms south of the Humber. After his death Edwin king 
of Northumbria succeeded to the leadership. During most of 
the eighth century Mercia was the leading state, and one of 

* These laws were written in the Germanic dialects of the Angles 
and Saxons; whereas the similar laws of the Franks, Burgundians, 
Lombards, and other German tribes on the continent were written in 
Latin. This is a further evidence of the absence of Roman influence 
on the Invaders. 

t See pp. 24, 25 for a description of the tribal organization of the 
Germans before the invasion. The social structure of the Angles and 
Saxons in Britain in the seventh century was not much more developed 
than that. 



334 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

its kings, Off a, a contemporary of Charlemagne, was overlord 
of most of the English kingdoms. At the beginning of the ninth 
^ g^_ century the southern kingdom of Wessex gained the 
comes the supremacy under its king, Egbert. This sort of 

Leading State. 111. -,• ^ , . .. ir • • 1 

overlordship did not m itself constitute a single 
English government; the defeated kings became for a time 
dependent, but the subject kingdoms retained their own laws 
and separate governments. These were, however, tentative 
steps in the process of unification. From the time of Egbert 
the supremacy remained permanently in the line of the kings 
of Wessex. 

Another event of capital importance in English history was 
the conversion of the Angles and Saxons to Christianity. This 
movement did not start from the Christian church of the 
^ . Britons, which had been established during the 

Conversion ' ^ <=> 

of the Angles Roman period. The remnants of the British re- 
garded their conquerors with fear and dislike, and 
made no serious attempt to convert them to the Christian faith. 
Down to the end of the sixth century the Angles and Saxons 
were still heathen. At this point (in 597) the pope, Gregory 
Sending of St -'-' ^^^^ ^ band of Roman monks under Augustine to 
Augustine. the English kingdom of Kent to carry the gospel to 
L., 24. the heathen there, and bring them into the Ro- 

Ch., 31-34. j^^j^ Catholic fold. Ethelbert, king of Kent, had 
married a Christian princess of the Merovingian Frankish line. 
He received the Roman missionaries hospitably and soon 
he and his people adopted the Christian faith. It spread 
northward from Kent very slowly, however, being resisted 
especially by .the heathen kings of Mercia. Moreover, some 
thirty years after the conversion of Kent missionaries from the 
older British church, which had spread to the north by the way 
of Ireland and Scotland, had established themselves in North- 
umbria, and had begun the work of converting the Angles of 
that region to their own form of Christianity.* The turning- 

* Christianity had appeared among the Britons while they were under 
Roman rule in the third century. After the invasion of the Angles 
and Saxons it had been crowded back with the Britons to the western 



ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION 335 

point came when the king oi Northumbria and his council de- 
cided in favor of the Roman church (664). 

The story of this council, as told by Bede, the chronicler of 
the next century, is characteristic. The representatives of the 
Celtic church defended its claims by appealing to its antiquity 
Conflict be- ^^^ ^^ ^^^ pious Hves and deeds of the missionary 
tweentheRo- saints who had established it. The Roman monks 

man and the 

Celtic appealed to the familiar argument of the papacy — 

that St. Peter, the founder of the Roman church, 
had been given supreme authority over the church as the 
''rock" and the ''keeper of the keys," and that he had handed 
on this power to his successors, the Roman bishops. When, 
in answer to the inquiry of the king, the Celtic monks had to 
admit the authority of St. Peter, the king, speaking for the 
council, declared for the Roman church, lest when he came to 
die the doorkeeper of heaven should refuse to admit him. We 
need not take Bede's account as necessarily authentic, for it is 
just the sort of popular story which a mediaeval chronicler would 
use to illustrate his point, without concerning himself very 
much with the critical question of its origin, but it is an in- 
teresting illustration of the use made by the Roman emissaries 
of the "Petrine theory," in their efforts to establish the unity 
of the church in the west under the pope. 

After this event the Christian church was rapidly estab- 
lished in all of the English kingdoms. A few years later (668), 
the pope sent one of his most able men, Theodore of Tarsus, 
to organize it as a part of the great Roman church of western 

edge of Britain, and was cut off from the main body of the western 
church during the very time when the papacy was developing as the 
central authority; therefore the Celtic church developed apart from 
the Roman church and differed from it in some particulars. It con- 
tinued to have a vigorous life, however. In the fifth century St. 
Patrick converted the Irish, and soon the Irish monks became famous 
for their learning, piety, and missionary zeal. They labored to con- 
vert not only the neighboring Scots, and the heathen Angles in North- 
umbria, but also went as missionaries among the heathen Germans 
on the continent. In the seventh and eighth centuries they founded 
monasteries in Gaul, Germany, and Italy; later, however, these monas- 
teries were taken over and absorbed by the Roman church. 



336 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Europe. The English territory was divided into bishoprics, 
and these were grouped in two ecclesiastical provinces, under 

the archbishop of Canterbury in the south and the 
of the Roman archbishop of York in the north. As we have seen, 
Endand^ the missionary work had been done by monks, 

and monasteries sprang up wherever the church 
was planted. These became in England, as everywhere, centres 
not only of religious life but of civilization and learning as well. 
We have noticed elsewhere the great services performed by 
the monks in establishing schools in the monasteries where at 
Monasf least the elements of a Latin education could be 

Education obtained. In England this was especially true of 

the monasteries of Northumbria. At the monas- 
teries of Wearmouth and Jarrow and the cathedral of York 
there were schools and libraries in the eighth century which 
were better than any in western Europe, with the possible ex- 
ception of some of the Italian monasteries. The learned Bede, 
abbot of Jarrow, was the greatest scholar of the age, and when 
Charlemagne, in the eighth century, sought out a scholar to 
organize the monastic education in his empire, he sent to North- 
umbria and secured Alcuin. 

The monastery schools of the eighth century were primarily 
concerned with religious teaching, and the amount of classical 
learning was very meagre. Still something of the general edu- 
cation of the Roman world survived in these schools, to throw 
a slender bridge across the dark ages from the fall of the Roman 
empire to the revival of the twelfth century. 

It was by the establishment of the Roman church more than 
by anything else that the history of England became in this 
early period a part of the general history of western Europe. 

The intellectual and cultural development thence- 
the^Churclffor forth followed the line that was to prevail in Eu- 
CiviUzation ^^P^ generally; that is, the transmission by the 

church of an amount of classical culture which was 
constantly being increased by the recovery and application of 
Latin works that had been lost to sight in the first centuries 
of violence and disorder. On becoming a part of the Roman 



§ Longitude 4. West from 2 GreeDwich East 




XIV 

ENGLISH KINGD031S 

IN THE 

EIGHTH CENTURY 



FO«TESCC..N.Y. 



Note to Map XIV. — This map shows the formation of territorial king- 
doms by the expansion westward of the Anglo and Saxon tribes. The 
West Saxons, Mercians, and Northumbrians were the leaders in this 
expansion; their growth cut off the eastern tribes, Jutes in Kent, East 
Saxons, South Saxons, and East Angles, and these kingdoms remained 
small. In the seventh and eighth centuries there were constant conflicts 
between the kings of the larger kingdoms for supremacy; early in the 
ninth century the supremacy passed permanently into the hands of the 
West Saxon kings. 



ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION 337 

church England was admitted to participation not only in 
the religious life common to all of western Europe but also 
to the inheritance of law and order and administration which 
had to such a large extent fallen to the church from the Roman 
imperial system. 

The development of the English people, which we have now 
traced to the end of the eighth century, was at this point inter- 
rupted by a serious disaster. About this time the shores of 
England began to be visited by bands of pirates 
theDanes. from the Scandinavian countries, whom the Eng- 
lish called indiscriminately Danes. It was much 
like the movement which had brought the Angles and Saxons 
themselves to the island. The Danes would swoop down on 
the coast, make a landing and sack a town or a monastery, and 
escape to their boats before the inefficient local forces could 
gather. Finding an easy prey, they came in increasing num- 
bers, and soon began to make permanent settlements on the 
coast, from which they advanced inland, conquering the coun- 
try. Before long the northern kingdoms of Northumbria, 
Mercia, and East Anglia fell wholly or in part under Danish 
chiefs. 

The successors of Egbert of Wessex had to battle desperately 
to defend their own kingdom from the Danes. Alfred, grand- 
son of Egbert, beat them off, but was forced to make a peace 
Alfred th ^^^^ them which left them in control of most of 
Great, 871- England north and east of the Thames valley. 
This Alfred (871-899) is known in English history 
as Alfred the Great. Later generations attributed to him 
the invention of most English institutions; although this is an 
exaggeration, his rule marks an important advance. After he 
had made peace with the Danes he devoted himself to the task 
of restoring order and prosperity in the land that had been dis- 
turbed by fifty years of Danish raids. This work, which in- 

„. „, , eluded administrative reforms, mihtary reforms, and 
His Work. ' -^ 

the restoration of churches, was done not only for 
Wessex but for all of the smaller kingdoms in the centre and 
south that had become subject to Wessex. In this way all of 



338 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the English who were not ruled by Danish chiefs were brought 
as never before under a single law and government; and this 
was the real basis of the political unification of the English. 

Alfred, like Charlemagne, was concerned with the spiritual 
and intellectual welfare of his kingdom; and, like him, he be- 
gan with a reform of education among the clergy. One inter- 
T g esting phase of this was the translation of Latin 

works undertaken by Alfred and the scholars he 
gathered about him, into Old English, the Germanic 
dialect of Wessex. These works were: Boethius's Consola- 
tions of Philosophy, Pope Gregory's Pastoral Care, Orosius's 
History of the World, and Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the 
English. All of these works are religious in tone and all of 
them lie in the period between 400 and 800. The fact that 
they were regarded as the Latin works most worth preserving 
and studying gives us some measure of the meagre knowledge 
which the age of Alfred possessed of the great world of Roman 
culture. 

The Danish occupation of northern England was not perma- 
nent. The vigorous successors of Alfred in the tenth century 
made war on the Danish rulers, defeated them, and brought all 
Recover ^^ England under their rule. Since the older lines 

of Danish of local English kings had disappeared during the 
Danish period, the way was open for the extension 
of Alfred's system to the reconquered territory. In this way 
all the English were brought not only under a single king but 
En land un- ^^^^^ ^ single system of government. The period 
der Edgar, of reconquest was followed by the peaceful and 
prosperous reign of King Edgar (959-975), which 
marks the highest point of the Anglo-Saxon period. It is a 
point at which we may pause to examine the form of govern- 
ment and society, since this will give us an idea of those deeply 
rooted English institutions which were to survive the Norman 
conquest and become a part of the England of later times. 

England was now ruled by a single king, who bore the title 
of ^'king of the English"; he was also recognized as overlord 
by the Welsh and Scottish princes. The central government 




Loagitude 



Long. 



Note to Map XV. — This map shows the division arranged in 886 by- 
King Alfred the Great and the chief leader of the Danes, Guthrum. The 
line from the Thames valley to Chester delimited their respective terri- 
tories. In the far north a part of the Northumbrians retained their in- 
dependence also. All of southern England formed a single state under King 
Alfred (871-899). Under Alfred's successors the Danish territory was 
reconquered and thus a single English kingdom was formed. 



ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION 339 

included the king's court and chief officials and a national coun- 
cil of leading lords and officials and clergy; this was called in 
li hi ^^^ English the Witenagemot, or "assembly of the 
stitutions. wise." The kingdom was divided into shires, in 
Central cach of which was a local assembly or shire-court. 

Government, rpj^g shire-court was no longer the general assem- 
Local: Shire- bly of all the freemen of the shire; its important 
members were the large landholders, but it included 
also representatives elected in the villages. The shire-court 
was under the direction, not of the old elected leader but of a 
royal agent known as the sheriff or shire-reeve, an official like 
the Frankish count. The shires were divided into hundreds, 
in each of which was a hundred-court, which served as an ordi- 
nary court of justice. 

An important change had taken place in the sopial structure. 
As among the Franks and other Germans on the continent, 
after the settlement a class of large landholders had developed, 

. . and the common freemen who had originally been 

Structure. free landowners were tending to become dependent 
Landed OH this upper ciass as serfs and tenants on their large 

Nobles. estates. The former free institutions of tribal times 

Dependent became aristocratic, since the landlord class acquired 

Tenants. t . i i /• i i i m^ 

political control of the local government. They 
also exercised to a considerable degree the rights of private 
jurisdiction over their dependents, although the local public 
courts of the shire and the hundred did not lose all of their 
power. Thus the manorial system grew up in England, though 
not as completely as on the continent. The relations of the 
landlords to one another and to the king had something of the 
private nature of allegiance which existed in feudalism, but not 
to the same extent. Moreover, military service was not a nec- 
essary feature of this relation. We may say, therefore, that 
the essential elements of the feudal and manorial systems were 
present in an incomplete and unsystematic form in England. 

A distinctive feature of English life was the existence of 
a rich written literature in the native tongue. The dialects 
spoken by the Angles and Saxons were closely related; after 



340 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the formation of a single kingdom the dialect of Wessex became 
the recognized standard and the basis of a single national 

language. This is known as Old English or Anglo- 
Language! Saxon. Like all the Germans, the Angles and 

Saxons had from early times a popular literature 
Literature. dealing with the legendary history of the tribe 

and the heroic deeds of famous chiefs. This 
literature was produced by minstrels or bards attached to 
the courts of tribal kings and chieftains. In older times 
these tales in verse were recited and sung; in the eighth cen- 
N t'onal ^^^ ^^^y yvere put into written form. Out of this 
Epic, the has come down to us one epic, or long narrative 

"Beowulf." , ,,^ ,, „ . . , , . , , 

poem, the Beowulf, recitmg the heroic deeds 
and death of a legendary hero of that name, and a number of 
shorter poems. This poetry had its origin in the heathen 
age, but was continued for a time in the eighth century after 

the introduction of Christianity. There was also 
FoeSy. ^ a considerable poetic literature in Old English of 
Prose ^ religious sort. Old English prose begins with 

Alfred's translations and the compiling in his time 
of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a history of the English from the 
time of the invasions, made up in its earlier parts from popular 
traditions, from Bede's history, and from local annals, and con- 
tinued from Alfred's time on by contemporary entries. 

Such was the political, social, and intellectual condition of 
the English in the later tenth century. The hundred years 
from that point to the Norman conquest can be covered very 
N Inva briefly. After Edgar's time the kingdom fell on 
sions of the evil times. Under the weak rule of Ethelred " the 

Redeless" (or ill-advised), the Danes renewed their 
attacks. Sven ''Forkbeard," king of Denmark, about the year 
looo, invaded England and conquered it; Ethelred took refuge 

in Normandy with his family. Cnut, son of Sven, 
Dane, King of became king of England in 1016, and for a generation 
foi6^io ' England was ruled by Danish kings. This made no 

great change, however, since Cnut and his sons 
governed by English law and as English kings. On the death 



ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION 341 

of the last of these, in 1042^ the line of Ethelred was restored in 
the person of his son Edward, known as Edward the Confessor, 
or St. Edward. 

The principal importance of Edward the Confessor's reign 

was that it served as an introduction to the Norman conquest 

of England. Edward had been brought up from his childhood 

Edward the ^^ Normandy. When he became king of England 

Confessor, he brought with him a large number of Normans 

whom he placed in the chief positions in church and 

state. This led to a reaction on the part of an English party 

headed by the chief noble of the land, Godwin, earl of Wessex. 

After a civil struggle the Normans were expelled 

and Edward came completely under the control 

of Godwin's son, Harold. As Edward had no son to succeed 

him, he recognized Harold as his heir, and the national council, 

the Witenagemot, confirmed this by electing Harold as king, on 

Edward's death in 1066. 

William, duke of Normandy, had hoped to secure the suc- 
cession for himself. He now put forward a claim to the throne, 
alleging that Edward had designated him as his successor. 
„,.,,. . In the fall of 1066 he sailed across the channel with 

William of 

Normandy In- an army of Normans and other French adventur- 
land,^io66; crs and landed in England. Harold, who had been 
Hastings Occupied with a revolt in the north, hurried south 
to meet him. The great English earls, however, 
' ' ' ' jealous perhaps of Harold's new title of king, failed 
to support him, and in the battle of Hastings Harold was 
defeated and slain. The national council, which had been 
hastily summoned by Harold, now submitted to the victor and 
recognized him as king. On Christmas day, 1066, William 
"the Conqueror" was crowned king of England. This ended 
the Anglo-Saxon period and began a new era in English history 
to which we must devote a separate chapter. 



CHAPTER XVIII 
THE FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 

The Norman conquest proved to be a turning-point in Eng- 
lish history. This was true especially in regard to the de- 
velopment of government. The political institutions of Eng- 
Im ortanceof ^^^^ have been produced by the combination of 
the Norman Old English or Anglo-Saxon elements with Norman 
elements brought in by the conquest. It is im- 
portant, therefore, before beginning the study of the effects 
of the Norman conquest, to review the features of Anglo- 
Saxon life which had been developed during six centuries, 
for these constitute the deeper elements in the national char- 
acter. One thing that distinguished England in the eleventh 
century from the countries on the continent was the existence 
Survival of ^^ local institutions of self-government. The shire- 
Local Govern- court and the hundred-court were derived from the 

ment in Shire r -i i • • i • i 

and Hundred popular local assemblies of tribal times, m which 
the freemen themselves, under elected officials, 
administered justice according to the tribal law and managed 
local affairs. By the tenth century these assemblies had be- 
come more aristocratic, and their principal members were the 
local landlords; the ordinary freemen, however, were still rep- 
resented in the assemblies and their cases were tried there 
by common law, although to a large extent they were subject 
also to the manorial justice of their own landlords. The sur- 
vival of these courts is in marked contrast to the situation 
on the continent, where manorial and feudal justice had so 
completely usurped the field as to cause the older popular courts 
to disappear entirely. 

It is in connection with these local courts that we should 
notice another important factor of English political and social 
life. This was the survival and development of the English 

342 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 343 

common law. As we have seen in our chapter on feudahsm, 
law in the feudal age was local custom, and the authority back 

of it was the personal authority of the lord. The 
Law.™°° Franks and other Germans on the continent had 

had tribal laws, applied in popular courts, but 
this system had vanished with the complete feudalizing of gov- 
ernment. In England, however, the Anglo-Saxon kings, from 
the time of Alfred, had carried on the development of the tribal 
laws as laws of the united kingdom. This was the body of law 
that was administered in the shire and hundred courts. It con- 
stituted one of the elements which were later combined to form 
the English common law. 

It is noteworthy also that the Anglo-Saxon kings, from the 
time of Alfred, had developed a government that was more 
nearly national than any to be found on the continent in the 

tenth or eleventh century. The Franks and other 
Monarchy. German tribes on the continent had been absorbed 

in the empire of Charlemagne, which, as we have 
noticed, was an attempt to revive the Roman imperial system; 
when that failed and the empire broke up into natural divisions, 
the work of developing national governments in those divisions 
was slow in beginning and had to be carried out with great 
difi&culty in the face of the feudal system. In England, on the 
contrary, there had been steady progress toward unified gov- 
ernment from the time of the invasions. The small tribes had 
united to form territorial kingdoms (Wessex, East Anglia, 
Northumbria, and so on) and these had united to form the one 
English kingdom. This had been accompanied by a correspond- 
ing unification of government. The tribal chieftains had been 
replaced by the territorial kings, and these by the king of all 
the English. The small tribes became divisions of the several 
kingdoms and were taken over as divisions of the single king- 
dom. The authority of the king was exercised through a national 
government. At the centre was the king and his court, and a 
national council; throughout the country the king was repre- 
sented in the shires by the royal agents, the sheriffs. The king 
and the council legislated for the whok country. There was 



344 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

even a suggestion of a national tax in the "Danegeld/' a con- 
tribution levied by the central government on all land, origi- 
nally instituted by Ethelred to buy off the Danes 
and kept up by his successors. This is not to say 
that the Anglo-Saxon government was strong, effective, and 
well-organized; but only that it was composed of native ele- 
ments which had developed naturally, and that it was national 
in its scope. 

There is another general fact that must be taken into account 
in the subsequent development of English history. The English 
constituted only one of several elements in the British isles. 
Relation to ^^ addition, there were the descendants of the older 
Other Parts of British inhabitants, many of whom continued to live 

British Isles. ..... r -r> • • i i i i 

a separate life m the west of Britam and developed 
into the Welsh. In Ireland and Scotland were numerous inde- 
pendent clans, mostly of Celtic blood like the Britons, but who 
had never come under Roman influence. During the Anglo- 
Saxon period, occasionally a strong English king had been able 
to assert an overlordship over some of the Welsh and Scottish 
princes; this was to be carried much farther after the Norman 
conquest, and eventually English influence and English rule 
became dominant in the whole of the British isles. The relation 
of the English government to the more or less subject Welsh, 
Scotch, and Irish constitutes one of the standing problems of 
English history. 

In a political way the most obvious effect of the Norman 
conquest was the introduction into England of the feudal sys- 
tem, although the essential elements were to some extent al- 
ready developed there. For several years after 
quest Brings the battle of Hastings William the Conqueror was 
s^s?em^^^^^ occupied in putting down local revolts of the Eng- 
lish lords; the crushing of these revolts was the real 
conquest of England. This gave him an opportunity to confis- 
cate the lands of the English nobility and confer them upon his 
Norman followers; in the space of a few years the great estates 
almost completely changed hands and became the fiefs of Nor- 
man lords, The terms on which they were held from the king 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 345 

were the familiar terms of the feudal system — personal alle- 
giance and military service. The greater Norman lords in turn 
gave out parts of their lands to their own followers and retainers 
on the same terms, and compelled the smaller English landlords 
to enter into the same relation of vassalage. Thus the feudal 
relations were established throughout the landholding class. 

In respect to the position of the king, however, the Eng- 
lish government did not become feudal; in fact, the Norman 
period is marked by the establishment of a strong monarchy. 
This fact is so important for later history as to deserve a some- 
what extended analysis. 

In the first place, William occupied a much stronger position 
in relation to the feudal lords than did the contemporary king 
of France. The Norman lords in England received their lands 
in scattered portions, as one district after another 
Norman ^g^g conquered and the lands confiscated and given 

Stronger out. Thus they were great and powerful landlords, 

than Other , , . . , , . - ,. 

Feudal Kings. Dut they were not semi-mdependent prmces 01 dis- 
tinct provinces, as w^ere the French dukes and counts. 
S^ois F^udar Moreover, William was determined to be the per- 
Lords. sonal ruler of all of the landed and military nobility, 

and not merely the overlord of the great lords. In 1086 he 
held a review of the military forces of the kingdom and com- 
pelled every holder of land by military tenure, whether he were 
a direct vassal of the king or the vassal of one of the great 
lords, to take an oath of allegiance to the king and swear fidelity 
to him before any other. This broke through the mediate or 
indirect character of the feudal bond, w^hich was its weakest 
feature from the point of view of the monarchy. William also 
made it a rule that no noble could build a castle on his lands 
without authorization from the king. 

In the second place, William regarded himself as the successor 
Maint ' ^^ ^^^ ^^^ English kings and the heir to whatever 

Rule as Eng- national powers they had possessed. These pow- 
ers he revived and strengthened, where they had, un- 
der the weaker rule of Edward the Confessor, faUen into disuse. 
He had a survey made of the landed wealth of the king- 



346 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

dom,* and made this the basis for a stricter enforcement of 
the land-tax. The old Witenagemot transmitted to the Norman 
feudal council something of its character of a na- 
Ch^^69. ' ^ tional council. WilUam revived the use of the 
sheriffs as agents of the king in the shires. Thus 
he had in his hands a machinery of royal administration, 
both central and local, which was more effective than any to 
be found elsewhere in feudal states in the eleventh century. 

And finally he preserved the old local government in the 
shires and hundreds. These assemblies enabled the king to 
keep a hand on local affairs through his sheriffs. Their pres- 
ervation, however, served also to keep alive the 

Preserves ' ^ ' , ^ 

Local Anglo-Saxon institutions of local self-government, 

and prevented the barons from absorbing all local 
powers. The shire-courts especially entered upon a more active 
political life; under later kings they were to become an impor- 
tant part in the development of a national government. 

Before we take up what must be our main theme, the de- 
velopment of the government under the new line of kings, we 
should notice the effects of the conquest on other than political 
Eflfects of matters in English life. One of the most im- 
Norman Con- portant consequences was the introduction of Nor- 

quest: ^ ^ 

man-French language and literature. After the 
French conquest the ruling class (higher clergy, nobles. 

Language. royal officials) became almost exclusively Norman; 
the language used in public business and in polite society, 
therefore, was Norman-French. This was a dialect of Old 
French, the language spoken in northern France, which, as we 

have noticed elsewhere, was derived from the 
Literature. spoken Latin. The literature composed by poets 

for noble patrons in England in the twelfth and 
thirteenth centuries was essentially a branch of French romantic 
literature, dealing in the main with the same subjects: Char- 
lemagne and his heroes. King Arthur and his knights. Old 

* The returns were collected in the famous Domesday Book, which 
gives us a detailed picture of the economic and social conditions of Eng- 
land in the eleventh century. 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 347 

English ceased almost entirely to be used as a literary lan- 
guage, although it continued to be spoken by the great body 
of the people. 

The closer connection with the continent and especially with 
France opened the way for the rapid introduction into England 
of other forms of culture in respect to which Anglo-Saxon Eng- 
land had been backward. This was true especially 
Education. ^^ ^^^ Culture fostered by the church. Under Wil- 
liam and his successors for a long time the great 
churchmen were all Normans. The English church schools 
were thus brought into line with that intellectual awakening 
which is known as the ''twelfth-century renaissance." This 
movement consisted in the recovery of the larger and more 
original Latin works which had been lost to sight during the 
centuries of violence and confusion; the result was that it was 
now possible to teach the ordinary subjects in an advanced 
form: to study grammar from more scientific Latin grammars 
and from the writings of Roman authors like Vergil; to study 
logic from translations of Aristotle; to study geometry from 
the great work of Euclid. This advance prepared the way for 
the development of special branches of study which were later 
to be taught in the universities. Although these developments 
are later than the conquest itself, it was that event which brought 
English education into the general current. 

The first Norman archbishop of Canterbury, Lanfranc, was 
a learned Italian who had been abbot of one of the chief Nor- 
man monasteries; he began the work of reforming and improv- 
ing the English schools. This was carried on by 
andSiselm. ^^^ successor, the learned Anselm. The work of 
Anselm was really of European importance, since 
he was virtually the first mediaeval theologian; the first to apply 
to religious questions, such as the existence and the nature of 
God, the logical and philosophical ideas which the Middle Age 
inherited from classical times. In this most important in- 
tellectual development England was to have an important 
part. 

The Normans also brought with them the greatest of mediaeval 



348 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

arts, that of architecture; for they were great builders, of 
churches as well as of castles. The Anglo-Saxon churches 

were mostly wooden structures. In the Norman 
ArcwScture. Period was begun the construction of large stone 

churches. These were at first of the heavy Roman- 
esque type; in the later twelfth century the lighter and more 
graceful Gothic type* developed in northern France and spread 
to England. 

So the Norman conquest is seen to be the beginning of a new 
life in every way for the English nation. The period of nearly 
a century, from the conquest to the accession of Henry II in 
1 154, is known as the ''Norman period," since it is the time in 
which the Norman rule was established and men of the Norman 
race controlled virtually everything. 

William the Conqueror reigned from 1066 to 1087. These 
twenty years were filled to the full with the most exacting 
duties. We shall meet with few monarchs of mediaeval times 
WW I th ^^ active and vigorous and intelligent as William I. 
Conqueror, He was strong-willed, and ruthless to his enemies, 

but in the main his rule was firm and just. The 
measures which he carried through laid the foundations of 
the strong national monarchy of England and they deserve to 
be analyzed. 

(i) His first problem was the reduction of the English to 
obedience. The battle of Hastings was only the opening of 
this campaign. For five years (from 1066 to 1071) he was 
_ , . , engaged in crushing revolts. Fortunately for him, 
English these revolts occurred one after another in different 

parts of the country and under leaders who failed 
to act together. Had they united, the Normans might have 
been expelled. William's strength lay in the warlike character 
of his Norman followers, who had their fortunes to make in 
England from the confiscated estates of the English rebels. 
The Normans were greatly superior to the English in fighting, 
especially in the building of castles and the besieging of castles. 
The resistance to William came from various quarters. The 
* For the description of these two types see pp. 491-494. 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 349 

sons of Harold headed a. re volt in the southwest. The great 
earls of Edward's time, fearing to lose the semi-royal position 
they had enjoyed, engaged in several revolts. In the north 
the English rose in behalf of Prince Edgar, a descendant of 
Ethelred, who claimed the throne. This rising was aided by 
the king of the Scots, who invaded England. William got the 
better of all of these revolts, but it required almost constant 
taking the field. We have already noted the fact 
that the crushing of these revolts resulted in the 
transfer of the great estates from English to Norman lords, 
and in the introduction of the feudal system of landholding. 

(2) No sooner was William well finished with the English 
resistance than he had to fight against his own Norman fol- 
lowers. They were willing to aid him in conquering the Eng- 
lish, since this was the way to make their own for- 

Rebeiiious tunes. They had no sympathy, however, for Wil- 
Barons^ Ham's idea of a strong and orderly government. 
They expected to hold their lands on the loose 
feudal terms and rule them in the semi-independent manner 
familiar to French feudal lords. When they found William's 
hand strong to hold them in order some of the greater lords 
revolted. In this they were aided by William's eldest son, 
Robert. The revolts in Normandy were also aided by the 
French king, Philip I. William succeeded in putting down 
these revolts and punishing the leaders, but the Norman barons 
in England and Normandy were long to be a source of trouble 
to the kings. 

(3) The administrative policy and measures of William we 
have already noticed in the general discussion of the Norman 
period. He broke up the earldoms of the Anglo-Saxon system, 
E t hi' h* which had comprised large sections of the kingdom. 
a Strong Henceforth the title of earl meant the chief lord of 

a single shire. He used the sheriffs to control the 
local government. He made a census of the lands and pos- 
sessions of his subjects (the Domesday Book) to serve as the 
basis for the collection of taxes. He compelled all the land- 
holding nobility to swear an oath of allegiance to him directly. 



350 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

(4) His ecclesiastical policy had important results for the 
future. He worked with his Norman archbishop, Lanfranc, 
to reform the English church and bring it into closer connection 

with the general church of western Europe. The 
PoHcyl^^ ^^^ Cluniac reforms were introduced; the clergy were 

forbidden to marry and simony was condemned. 
William refused, however, to surrender his right to invest and 
control the bishops. Gregory VII put forth a claim to the over- 
lordship of England and demanded that William do homage to 
him for the kingdom. William refused on the ground that 
former English kings had never done so, and Gregory VII was 
too much occupied with his struggle with the emperor Henry IV 
to press the matter. 

(5) William continued the policy of the strong English kings 
who had tried to establish some sort of overlordship over the 
Welsh and Scotch. The help given by the king of the Scots to 

the rebellious English gave William an excuse for 
with Welsh invading Scotland and forcing the king of the Scots 

to do him homage. He kept the Welsh under by 
establishing powerful Norman lords on the frontier of Wales 
and encouraging them to encroach on the lands of the small 
Welsh chieftains. 

(6) He was engaged in frequent quarrels with the king of 
France, Philip I. The relations of the feudal king with his 
great vassals were usually hostile, and William, as duke of Nor- 

. , mandy, had fought against his overlord. After 
the King of the conqucst, however, the conflict took on a dif- 
ferent aspect. William was both duke of Normandy 
and king of England; as duke of Normandy he was still a French 
lord and a vassal of the king of France. Philip constantly in- 
trigued with the Norman barons in England and in Normandy 
and with William's son Robert, with the object of getting Nor- 
mandy away from the king of England. It was in war against 
the king of France that William met his death, in 1087. 

On his death William I left Normandy to his oldest son 
Robert, but willed the English crown to his next son William. 
It was evidently his intention to separate the two possessions, 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 351 

but this was not the ultimate outcome. William II succeeded 
his father as king of England without difficulty. Robert, the 
w'lr II older brother, accepted the duchy of Normandy; 
"Rufus," ' later, when he determined to go on the first crusade, 
1 100. j^^ pledged it to William II for the money to make 
the expedition. The reign of William II (known as "William 
Rufus," from his red hair) was much harsher than that of his 

father. Where the Conqueror had used stern mea- 
rSb. "^ sures to establish order, William II had recourse to 

harsh and oppressive measures, merely to increase 
his own revenues without regard to justice or good government. 
He used his rights as feudal overlord to despoil the barons by 
collecting excessive feudal dues; he levied heavy taxes; he 
kept church offices vacant in order to collect the revenues from 
/- a- . -.1- the estates attached to them. His treatment of 

Conflict with 

Archbishop the clergy brought on a conflict with the aged and 
pious archbishop Anselm, who had succeeded Lan- 
franc in 1093 after a four years' vacancy in the office. Anselm 
rebuked the king for his evil life and remonstrated against his 
abuse of the church. After a prolonged st-ruggle Anselm was 
driven into exile. In spite of general discontent William 
Rufus ruled with a strong hand until his sudden death in 

IIOO.* 

The evil reign of William II had one important result on the 
reign of his younger brother, Henry, who succeeded him: in 
order to win the support of the nobles and clergy, Henry I is- 
Henry I, sued a charter in which he pledged himself to rule 
^^^ * well, to abandon the evil customs of his brother, 
A 'amis 7 ^^^ ^^ restore the laws of Edward the Confessor. 
Ch., 73. This Charter of Liberties is the forerunner of the 

Great Charter (Magna Carta); it amounts to an admission 

* The king was hunting In one of the royal forests when he was shot 
to death by an arrow from an unknown hand. His contemporaries 
regarded this violent death as an act of divine judgment because of his 
oppressive deeds. In popular minds it was associated with the harsh 
forest laws enforced by the Norman kings. William the Conqueror 
had made laws inflicting heavy penalties and even death upon any who 
should kill game in the hunting preserves claimed by the king. 



352 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

that English subjects have rights under ancient law which may 
not be violated by the monarch. 

Henry I also got the duchy of Normandy into his hands, al- 
though he had to fight against his older brother, Robert, and the 
French king, Louis VI, to do so. In this war English and 

Normans fought side by side in France. Henry 
of°Henry L sought in many ways to reconcile the older English 

population with his rule; among other things he 
married an English princess of the line of Alfred. Under him 
also there was an important advance in the organization of the 
government. The king's court became a real central govern- 
ment. Two special departments were created: the royal court 
of justice, whose judges tried the cases that came before the king, 
and also exercised supervision over the administration of jus- 
tice in the shire-courts; and the exchequer or treasury, which 
systematized the collection of the revenue. 

The strong and just rule of Henry I was followed by a period 
of civil struggle between his daughter Matilda and another 
claimant for the throne, Stephen, count of Blois, a grandson 
Civil War ^^ ^^^ Conqueror. This was the opportunity of 
between the great barons, who had been held in check by 

Stephen and ^ ^ ■, , r r i • rr^T • i 

Matilda, the firm hands of former kmgs. They occupied 
1135-1154- royal lands, built castles without authorization, 
and made themselves virtually independent lords in their dis- 
tricts. The dispute over the throne was settled by an arrange- 
ment between Stephen and the son of Matilda, Henry of An- 
jou, whereby Henry was recognized as Stephen's heir. In 
1 1 54, on the death of Stephen, he succeeded to the throne as 
Henry II. 

The accession of Henry II is the beginning of a new period. 
The century and a half from then to the death of Edward I, in 
1307, is the constructive period in the formation of the English 
constitution. This is the line which we must follow mainly, 
although we must notice other interesting movements also. 
In this movement three important phases are to be noted: (i) 
the administrative measures of Henry II, which connected the 
central with the local government and made a really national 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 353 

administrative system; (2) the enforced concession of the Great 
Charter by John, which guaranteed to EngHsh subjects justice 
and individual rights and is justly regarded as the foundation 
of Enghsh liberties; (3) the development of a new organ of 
government, the Parliament, which was composed partly of 
elected representatives, and which, possessing independent 
powers, acted as a check on the king and made the English 
monarchy a limited or constitutional monarchy. 

Henry II* was not only king of England, but also lord of 
a large part of France. Through his mother, Matilda, he was 
descended from William the Conqueror and inherited the Eng- 
lish crown and the duchy of Normandy; his father 
Lands of was count of Anjou, one of the largest of the French 
^^^^ ' principalities, which also fell to Henry; Henry had 
married Eleanor, heiress of the great duchy of Aquitaine, which 
brought that land into his control. Thus he was overlord of 
more than half of France, although, of course, he held these 
lands as a vassal of the king of France and did homage to him 
for them. These possessions involved Henry II and his suc- 
cessors in conflicts with the kings of France f; for this was the 
period in which the French monarchs, such as PhiHp Augustus, 
were working to make their authority real over all of France. 

Our chief interest, however, is with the administrative mea- 
sures of Henry II as king of England. Building on the improve- 
ments made by Henry I, he sought to make his 
tive Meas- authority effective throughout the country, by link- 
ures. jjjg ^p ^YiQ local Organs of government with the cen- 

Circuit tral government. Such a link already existed in 

Judges. 

the sheriffs, who collected revenues from the shires 
Ch., 90. ^^^ reported to the exchequer. Henry strength- 

ened this organization, and also established a na- 
tional administration of justice by connecting the shire-courts 
with the royal court of justice. He divided the country into 

* Henry II is the first of the " Plantagenet " or "Angevin" line of 
kings. These names were taken from his father's family of the counts 
of Anjou, whose badge was a sprig of broom {planta genistcB). 

t See pp. 315-316 for the story of this struggle. 



354 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

circuits, and appointed royal judges, whose duty it was to travel 
through their circuit and visit each shire to try the more im- 
portant cases. A committee of the shire-court was 

Grand Jury. ^ 

to be appointed in each shire to report to the royal 
judges the local cases; this committee was called a jury, and 
is the forerunner of our modern grand jury. 

These travelling judges were connected with the royal court 
of justice, which we mentioned as developing in the time of 
Henry I. It consisted now of two divisions, the court of 
King's Bench, which was concerned with important criminal 
cases and with crown cases, and the court of Common Pleas, to 
which private suits were appealed. The travelling judges put 
into effect the legislation of Henry II in their control of local 
justice in the shire-courts. Thus the old English common law 
was amalgamated with the new royal statutes and administra- 
tive law, making a single body of law for the whole kingdom. 
The private jurisdictions of landlords and the feudal customary 
law continued to exist, but became more and more exceptional. 

In connection with this important judicial reform, we should 
notice the introduction of trial by jury, which was of Norman 
origin. In Anglo-Saxon as in other Germanic tribal courts, 
the fact of guilt or innocence was established by 
Jury. ^ oaths or by the ordeal. The Normans had for some 

time employed the method of inquest: the de- 
termination of the facts by the testimony of a number of men 
sworn to tell the truth. This was first extended to legal cases 
where criminal charges were involved; during the reign of 
Henry II it came into general use in the trials before royal 
judges for civil as well as criminal cases. The jury was at this 
time not a real jury as we use the word, but rather a body of 
sworn witnesses, on whose testimony the royal judges decided 
the case. Much later it became what it is now, a sworn body 
of men who determine the fact of guilt or innocence according 
to the testimony of witnesses. 

Henry's efforts to bring the judicial system entirely under 
the royal court brought him into conflict with the church, in the 
famous case of Thomas Becket. Becket had been chancellor 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 355 

of the kingdom and one of -Henry's trusted officials. Henry had 
made him archbishop of Canterbury, in the expectation that he 
Conflict would help to bring the church courts also under 

with the the royal control. Becket, however, devoted his 

Church; "^ . -, r i- \ - ^ -, 

Thomas energy rather to deiendmg the independence of the 

^^ ^^' ecclesiastical courts. When the king issued a law 

putting the clergy under the royal courts Becket resisted and 

retired from the country. A few years later he was induced to 

return, but the quarrel broke out again, and Becket 
Becket ° "^^^ murdered by some of Henry's retainers. The 

pope made good political use of this evil deed; 
he declared Becket a martyr and saint,* and threatened the 
kmg with excommunication. Henry made peace only by with- 
drawing his obnoxious law and doing penance at the tomb of 
Becket. The case is significant as an early illustration of the 
fact that the national government was bound to run counter 
to the church as soon as it strove to bring sovereign authority 
completely into its hands; for the church exercised large powers 
in every country. 

The increased importance and activities of the shire-courts, 
owing to their connection in a functional way with the central 
government, had an interesting effect upon the local landed 

nobility. They found in the shire-courts oppor- 
Local Nobles tunities for more peaceful and constructive work 
Courtr* ^^^^ fighting with their neighbors; they could 

serve on committees to deal with the sheriffs or on 
juries to meet with the royal judges. Another practice, de- 
veloped at this time, worked in the same direction. It had be- 
come customary for the king to accept a money payment in 

lieu of military service from the lesser nobility. This 

Scutage. "^ 

payment, known as scutage (shield money) became a 
regular tax levied upon the landholding class. It freed the 
local landlords from the necessity of following the king in war, 
which was the obligation they owed for their lands, and left 
them to devote themselves to their local affairs. From feudal 

* This is St. Thomas, of Canterbury, to whose tomb the pilgrims in 
Chaucer's Canterbury Tales were going. 



3S6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

warriors they became ''country gentlemen" and developed into 
that conservative class which furnished the most solid element 
in the local government and the stanchest opponents of royal 
tyranny. 

The extension of English rule over other parts of the British 
isles was greatly advanced during the reign of Henry 11. Ire- 
land was composed of numerous small clans; here in Henry's 

time some of the Norman lords found an outlet for 
Ireland. ^^ ^^^^^ adventurous spirits by taking a hand in the 

petty wars that were constantly going on among 
these clans, and winning lands for themselves. Henry II forced 
these Norman lords and the native Irish chiefs to recognize 
him as overlord. Henceforth the English kings included among 
their titles the title of "Lord of Ireland." English rule, how- 
ever, did not amount to much in Ireland during the Middle 
Age. 

Wales during the Norman period had been coming under 
English influence. Powerful Norman lords had been granted 
lands along the Welsh border and had increased their lands 

by encroaching on the native Welsh territory. In 

Henry's time there was little left of the independent 
kingdom of Wales except the outer shell along the coast. The 
native Welsh princes in this region were forced to do homage 
to Henry, so that all of Wales was in one way or the other 

subject to his government. The king of Scotland 

invaded England and was made prisoner; Henry 
released him only after he had done homage to the king of 
England for his Scotch throne. 

Henry's latter days were embittered by almost constant 
quarrels in his own family. He imprisoned his wife, Eleanor 
of Aquitaine, because she stirred up their sons to revolt. Philip 

Augustus of France took advantage of these quar- 
SoTs^evolt. ^^^^ ^^ t^^ English royal family and aided the sons 

of Henry as a means of embarrassing him in his 
French possessions. It was on an expedition against such a 
revolt in France, in which his sons were allied with the king of 
France, that Henry II met his death in 1189. 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 357 

The reign of Henry's son Richard Lionheart was spent mostly 
out of England, on the third crusade, in captivity in Germany 
on the way home from that crusade, and in wars in France 
R' h rd I against Philip Augustus. His reign, therefore, has 
"Lionheart," little importance in the development of the English 

^ ^^^ * constitution. His prolonged absence put the govern- 
mental machinery of Henry II to a test which it stood very well. 

Richard was succeeded in 11 99 by his younger brother John. 
In the history of the English government the most important 
event of this reign was the granting of the Great Charter (Magna 
Carta). This charter was wrested from the king 
1199-1216. by t^^ barons; the barons, however, acted as repre- 
sentatives of all the important classes of the king- 
dom, and they demanded, not that the royal power should be 
destroyed but that the king should rule in accordance with the 
law. In order to understand this we must recur to the peculiar 
situation in England. In strictly feudal countries political 
development necessarily took the form of a conflict between the 
great nobles trying to maintain their sovereign powers and the 
king striving to make himself the sole sovereign. The choice, 
therefore, was virtually between feudal disunion and absolute 
government. Germany developed in one way, France in the 
other. In England there was an element which 
Feature of stood between these two extremes and which was 
M?narcliy destined to develop at the expense of both. This 
was the Anglo-Saxon government which had de- 
veloped from tribal times and which contained the seeds of 
free institutions. It was to this that Henry I referred when he 
promised, in the Charter of Liberties, to rule in accordance 
with the laws of Edward the Confessor; it was this element 
which Henry II connected with the central government in his 
administrative measures, which aimed at making the royal 
power supreme over the great lords. The old English institu- 
tions could be appealed to by the king against the feudal in- 
dependence of the barons, and by the barons against the tyranny 
and misrule of a bad king. This latter use was now to be ap- 
plied against King John. 



358 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

John succeeded in the course of his reign in turning against 
him all the important elements in the kingdom: clergy, great 
barons, landed nobles, and merchants of the cities. In the 

first place he allowed a large part of his French 
with°john. inheritance to slip from his hands. The shrewd 

and able Philip Augustus, who had sided with 
Richard and John in their revolts against their father 
Henry II, and had intrigued with John against Richard, 
now continued his machinations against John. The folly and 

incapacity of John furthered his schemes. De- 
French Lands, claring John's French fiefs forfeited, Philip occupied 

Normandy and Anjou in force and added them to 
his own crown lands. John made half-hearted attempts to 
recover them, but the futility of his efforts only added to his 
humiliation. This was enough to turn against him the war- 
like barons of England who had been used to the leadership of 
strong men like Henry II and Richard; they were outraged also 
by John's demand for military service and military taxes for a 
war that was never seriously undertaken. As a matter of fact, 
in the long run the loss of Normandy and Anjou was a good 
thing for the nation, since it forced the nobles to abandon 
their foreign holdings and settle down as Englishmen. Never- 
theless, it was felt as a humiliation by the baronage. 

In the second place, John became involved in a quarrel with 
the great pope, Innocent HI. A dispute had arisen over the 
election of the archbishop of Canterbury, and Innocent III, 

appealed to by one party, took the case into his 
Snocentlil. ^^n hands and appointed Stephen Langton, an Eng- 
lishman attached to the papal court. John refused 
to accept him or to allow him to land in England. To bring 
the king to terms, the pope placed England under an interdict, 
which suspended the ordinary religious services and aroused 

great popular ill-will against the king. John disre- 
of^johi?'^'°° garded the interdict and the pope excommunicated 

him. An excommunication had the effect of freeing 
his subjects and followers from their oaths of allegiance. John 
was aware that he had enemies enough who would gladly take 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 359 

this opportunity; the excommunication, therefore, brought 
him to his knees. Innocent drove a hard bargain: John had 
not only to sue for pardon and accept the archbishop; he had 
also to do homage to the pope as a vassal for the English crown 
and pay an annual tribute, which did not increase the respect 
of the barons for their king. 

Finally, the government of John was tyrannical and capri- 
cious. He allowed foreign favorites to rule him and enrich them- 
selves. He demanded excessive taxes from the nobles and the 
, . cities. He had bitterly oppressed the clergy during 
trary Rule, his quarrel with the pope. He allowed the strong 
R., I, 99. administrative system of Henry II to fall to pieces, 
L-, 75-79- so that no man was sure of justice and peace. The 
Magna great nobles at last rebelled. Under the leadership 

Carta, 1215. 

of the archbishop, Stephen Langton, they drew up a 
programme of reforms, based on the Charter of Liberties of Henry 
I, and presented it to John with their weapons in their hands. 
The meeting took place in an open meadow near London, known 
as Runnymede, on June 15, 121 5. John was forced to yield 
and the Great Charter was issued in the form of a grant of liber- 
ties by the king. 

As was to be expected, the charter confirmed in detail the 
rights and privileges of the ruling class, the great barons and 
the clergy. It contained, however, more general provisions as 
well. To no one would the king deny, or delay, or 
L.,'8o.^ sell justice; no freeman should be deprived of his 

A. and s _, 29. liberty or his property except by trial before a 
Ch., no. jury of his peers. The king would not levy any tax 
Provisions. or feudal aid without the consent of the Great 
Significance. Council. The charter was a recognition of the 
principle that the English nation had the right to 
government according to law, and that the earlier achievements 
in the way of liberties and orderly government were binding on 
succeeding kings. In this way the Great Charter is the founda- 
tion of English liberties. 

The next stage in the development of the English constitu- 
tion was the growth of Parliament. This occurred in the reigns 



36o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

of the next two kings, Henry III and Edward I. The term 
ParUament was applied in the thirteenth century to meetings 

of the Great Council. This body was the successor 
ParlTament. ^^ ^^^ ^^^ English Witenagemot; in the Norman 

period it had taken on a feudal character and was 
composed of the great barons who held their lands and titles 
directly from the king, including the higher clergy. It was 

customary occasionally to summon also repre- 
GreaT Council, sentatives of the lesser nobility; this was done by 

sending out summonses through the sheriffs to the 
shire-courts to elect members to attend the meeting of the 
Great Council. Now, at the end of the thirteenth century, an 
important innovation was made, consisting of the summoning 
of representatives from the cities as well; this gave a still more 
representative character to Parliament. We must notice the 
circumstances which brought about this change. 

Henry III, son of John, succeeded in 1216 as a mere child. 
During his minority a regency of high officials and great barons 
ruled for him in accordance with the principles of the Great 
Henry III Charter. When he came of age, however, he turned 
1216-1272. out to be a weak and unwise ruler. He was per- 
His unwise sonally a better man than his father; he was a 
^"^" brave knight and a pious man. This did not pre- 

vent him from ruling badly: he was governed by unworthy 
foreign favorites, he violated the principles of the Charter, and 
constantly demanded aids and taxes the proceeds of which were 
wasted. His foreign policy was no better. Twice he invaded 
France in attempts to recover the lands taken from John, and 
both enterprises were wretched failures.* Moreover, his piety 
caused him to take seriously his obligations as a vassal of the 
pope; he paid the annual tribute promised by John and aided 
the papacy with men and money in the struggle with the Em- 
peror Frederick II, an affair that had no connection with the 
national interests of England. Several times the barons, in 

* They resulted, however, in a treaty which settled the matter for a 
time. Henry III abandoned his claims to the lands actually taken from 
John, and Louis IX invested him with the duchy of Guienne, which in- 
cluded part of the old duchy of Aquitaine. 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 361 

meetings of the Great Council (or Parliaments), protested and 
made the king promise to abandon his excessive taxes and dis- 
regard of laws, but Henry had no difficulty in getting the pope 
• J to absolve him from these promises. Finally a 
Simon de party of the barons under the lead of Simon de 

Montfort, took arms and defeated the king's mer- 
of^s^mon^^e senary troops and made him prisoner. In order to 
Montfort, secure the backing of the nation for the permanent 

reforms which he aimed to make, de Montfort called 
a Parliament to which he summoned not only representatives 
from the landed gentry in the shires but also representatives of 

the merchant class in the cities. This was the first 
the^Precedent. ^^^^ ^^^^ both sorts of representatives had met 

with the Great Council to form a Parliament; and 
the precedent is of great significance. It was not, to be sure, 
immediately followed up. Simon de Montfort was defeated 
and slain the same year and the king restored to his indepen- 
dence; for the next thirty years Parliament continued to mean 
a meeting of the prelates and barons. 

The permanent establishment of Parliament as a representa- 
tive body came in the reign of Henry Ill's son and successor, 
Edward I (1272-1307). In 1295 he was confronted with a 

situation in which he needed the support of the 
127T-1307. whole nation, being threatened with war by the 

king of France and with revolts in Wales and 
Scotland. So he called a Parliament which included the Great 
Council (the higher clergy and great barons), representatives 
of the lower clergy, two knights from each shire, and two 
citizens (burgesses) from each important city (borough). 
"Model '^^^^ body was truly representative; for it included 

Parliament," members of all the important elements in the nation. 

Hence it is usually called the ''Model Parliament." 

rr% -ry ^ 

nent Ek™^" ^^ l^^ter Parliaments the lower clergy were not in- 
ments in eluded, since the church had its own representative 

Parliament: ' _ ^ . 

Peers and councils and preferred to deal with the king as a 

separate corporation; the higher clergy continued 

to attend Parliament because they were members of the 

Great Council. This left two essential elements in the Parlia- 



362 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ments: the "peers" or lords (both clerical and secular), who 
had formed the old Great Council; and the elected represen- 
tatives of country and city districts. These two elements de- 
veloped later into the House of Lords and the House of Com- 
mons. 

The most important fact about Parliament was that it came 
to acquire certain defined powers. If Edward I and his suc- 
cessors called frequent meetings of Parliament, it was because 
p . they needed its support, especially in the raising of 
quired by revenue to run the government. The practice of 

Parliament. . . , , , , , . 

securmg the needed revenues by general taxes had 
not developed in the thirteenth century. The chief sources 
of revenue were the personal estates of the king, and certain 
customary payments, such as feudal aids from the barons, 
"free gifts" from the church, and contributions from the cities. 
These were no longer adequate to the expenses of a govern- 
mental machinery that had since the time of Henry II become 
very complicated, and of a government that was about to em- 
bark in that most costly of national enterprises, foreign war. 
The old revenues, since they rested on ancient cus- 
Required for tom, could not be increased by the king without 
of Taxes' ^^^ consent of those who paid. In Parliament all 
the propertied classes were represented, and what 
the king sought from Parliament mainly was its authorization 
for the levying of contributions. 

This did not mean that Parliament levied taxes; it meant 
that it became a recognized principle that the king could not 
levy a new tax without the consent of Parliament. This con- 
tained the germs of all the later powers of Parlia- 
tains Germs Hient; for if it had the right to grant taxes it also 
Powerr ^^^ ^^^ right to refuse to grant taxes, or at least 

to bargain with the king about granting taxes. 
These powers developed later than our period, but the fact 
that they were latent in the very reason for calling Parliament 
is what gives that body its chief significance. 

Edward I was the greatest lawmaker among mediaeval 
English kings. His laws were not innovations, but were aimed 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 363 

at putting into legal form the powers which the central govern- 
ment had acquired since tHe time of Henry II. An important 
Edward I a ^^^ture of this legislation was his attempt to bring the 
Great Law- independent jurisdiction exercised by the baronial 
courts and the church courts under the control 
of the royal judicial system. His more important laws were 
brought out as statutes, that is, laws enacted by the king 
with the advice and approval of Parliament. After 
Parliament became a permanently representative 
body, it continued to possess this right of being consulted in 
regard to the making of laws, and this was a source of the final 
control over legislation which it was eventually to acquire. 

It was inevitable that this assertion of the supremacy of the 
national government should bring about a conflict with the 
church. The church, with its wealth and power, its strong 
Edward I Organization, its own body of law and system of 
and the courts, already, even before the growth of national 

Church. • 1 1 r 1 n 1 ^ r 

governments, occupied a large part of the field of 

authority over which the national government was attempting 

to establish its control. Since the time of Gregory VII the 

popes had maintained that the authority of the church was 

^ , . superior to that of the state. In the time of Ed- 
Quarrel Wltfl 
Boniface ward I the difference arose over a matter of the 

greatest importance to the government, its right to 
Clertcts ^ax the income and property of churchmen. Boni- 

face VIII forbade this in the papal bull Clericis LatcoSj 
as we noticed in the history of France. Edward I answered, 
with a lawyer's logic, that if the English clergy were not to 
contribute to the maintenance of the government, they need 
not expect protection from the English law. In the end the 
pope gave way; the clergy were to be allowed to pay taxes, 
but these were to be known as "free gifts." 

Edward I sought to extend the authority of the English gov- 
ernment over Wales and Scotland. In Wales a native prince, 
Llewelyn, had brought the remnants of Welsh territory under his 
rule, and had even recovered a good deal of the lands formerly 
taken from the Welsh by the Norman lords. He had been able 



364 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

to do this because of the troubles in England at the time of the 
revolt of Simon de Montfort. On the accession of Edward I, 
Llewelyn refused to do him homage. Edward in-t 
andWales. vaded Wales and brought him to terms, but later 
risings broke out and it was some time before 
Wales was entirely subdued. Edward then divided the Welsh 
lands into shires and introduced English government. The 
territory possessed a form of independent existence, since it was 
erected into a principality, to be held by the son of 
of Wales "^^ the king of England. "Prince of Wales" is the 
title still used by the heir to the English crown. 
Edward's attempt upon the independence of Scotland was 
not successful. In fact, it produced a national awakening in 
Scotland and a brief heroic period in Scotch history, con- 
nected with the names of Robert Bruce, Sir William 
Wallace, and the battle of Bannockburn. The 
Succession 2-ffair began with a disputed succession to the 
Scotch throne, which was referred to Edward as 
arbitrator. The two principal claimants were Robert Bruce and 
John Balliol. Edward agreed to decide the case on the condi- 
tion that the new king would do homage to him for the Scotch 
throne. He decided in favor of John Balliol, who then per- 
formed the act of homage. Later, however, when Edward I 
undertook to interfere in Scotch affairs, the Scotch forced 
Balliol to lead them in revolt, and the French king, Philip IV, 
sent them help. This was the occasion of the summoning of 
the Model Parliament by Edward I. 

First Edward invaded Scotland, made Balliol prisoner, 

Scotland. ^^^ proceeded to rule Scotland by his agents as if it 
„, „ , were his personal possession. The harsh rule of the 

Wallace s ^ ^ ^ i . • 

Revolt. English agents led to a new rismg, this time under a 

Second simple knight. Sir William Wallace.* He was suc- 

Invasion. cessful in driving the English out of Scotland, but 
was defeated when Edward himself came to Scotland with an 
army. 

* This rising is the subject of the famous popular romance, The Scottish 
Chiefs, by Jane Porter. 



FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 365 

Yet a third time the Scotch revolted. The leader in this 
was Robert Bruce, grandson of the Bruce who had been a can- 
didate for the throne. After slaying an English agent Bruce 
. ^ took to the hills, gathered a following about him, 

Robert Bruce, and proclaimed himself king. Edward I again 
Battle of Ban- set out for Scotland, but died on the way. Under 
1314^ scotch ^^^ weak rule of his incompetent son Edward II, 
Independence Bruce succeeded in driving out the English garrisons 
and bringing all of Scotland under his rule. The 
decisive battle was that of Bannockburn in 13 14.* In 1328 the 
English government recognized the independence of Scotland 
by the treaty of Northampton. 

Edward I also had trouble with France in the latter part of 
his reign. Philip IV tried to take from him what was left of the 
English possessions in France; this was his motive in support- 
ing the Scotch revolt. Edward I made ready for 
France?^ war and Philip gave way. To cement the peace. 
Prince Edward, later Edward II, married Isabella, 
daughter of Philip IV, a marriage from which later English 
kings derived their claim to the French throne. 

The reign of Edward II showed a sad decline from the great- 
ness of his father's rule. As has been noticed, he virtually aban- 
doned the Scotch war, and allowed Robert Bruce to reconquer 
Edward II ^^^ kingdom from the English. All his life he was 
1307-1327, ruled by favorites, whom he allowed to govern for 
him and to enrich themselves at the expense of the 
country. At one time the great lords revolted and compelled 
the king to accept the control of a committee of the nobles. At 
the end of his reign his own wife, Isabella of France, sided with 
the discontented nobles in an attack upon him. He was de- 
feated and compelled to abdicate in favor of his young son, 
Edward III, who was to rule under the regency of the queen 
and her paramour, Roger Mortimer (1377). The next year 

* Robert Burns's poem, "Bannockburn," purports to represent 
Bruce's address to the soldiers: 

"Scots wha hae' wi' Wallace bled, 
Scots wham Bruce hae' aften led," etc. 



366 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Edward II was brutally murdered in prison by the agents of 
Isabella and Mortimer. With the reign of Edward III we come 
to the period of the Hundred Years' War, which lies beyond the 
limits of this chapter. 



CHAPTER XIX 
THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 

In preceding chapters we have studied the history of Eng- 
land and of France to the end of the thirteenth century. By 
this time each may be said to have become a nation. We have 
now to study the history of the prolonged series of 
dred Years' wars between these two countries, known as the 
Cause.^^^^ "Hundred Years' War." This was really the cul- 
mination of a conflict that had been going on since 
the Norman conquest. The underlying cause was the fact 
that the king of England held lands in France as a vassal of 
the French king. This meant that the king of England was 
virtually ruler over a part of France, for the holding of a fief 
carried with it the exercise of a considerable measure of sover- 
eign authority over the land and people which composed it. 
The inconsistency became more glaring after the king of France 
had developed a national government; he was not master in 
his kingdom as long as a foreign monarch ruled over part of it. 
We have noticed earlier phases of the conflict in the struggle 
of Philip Augustus against Henry II, Richard I, and John of 
England; in the wars of Louis IX and Henry III, and the 
threatened war between Philip IV and Edward I. By the be- 
ginning of the fourteenth century both countries had progressed 
so far in the development of national government and national 
feeling that the conflict took the form of national wars. 

The deeper cause of the war, therefore, was the long-standing 
hostility between the French government, determined to 
complete the unification of French territory under the king, 
and the English government, equally determined to retain pos- 
session of the French lands. The reason for the outbreak of 
war at this particular time, however, was another matter, the 
interference of France in Scotch affairs, which was regarded by 

367 



368 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the English government as a menace to English interests. The 

Scotch had won their independence under Robert Bruce, it 

will be remembered, and the regents of Edward III 

Immediate 

Occasion: had recognized this in the treaty of 1328. Robert 
teHerence" Bruce died in 1329, leaving an infant son, David, 
m Scotch |-Q succeed him. At this point the English gov- 
ernment encouraged another claimant, Edward Bal- 
liol (son of that John Balliol who had been king of Scotland 
for a time under Edward I), to revive his claims to the Scotch 
throne, and gave him help, on the condition that he would do 
homage to England if he were successful. Balliol succeeded at 
first, but the party of Bruce received help from France and re- 
stored their young king. The English answer was to declare 
war on France in 1337. 

In declaring war Parliament asserted as its reason the rights 
of Edward III to the French throne.* As we have seen, he was 
the son of a daughter of Philip IV of France. Charles IV, the 
last of the sons of Philip IV, had died without leav- 
ward III to ing a son to succeed him, in 1328. At that time 
Tbrone^'^^ the regents of Edward III had presented his claims, 
but the French court had decided against him, de- 
claring that the French throne descended through the male 

* Genealogy of French kings In first part of Hundred Years' War: 

Philip HI 



Philip IV Charles of Valois 



I \ \ I .„. 

Louis X Philip V Charles IV Isabella Philip VI 

d. 1328 m. Edward II 1328-1350 

of England | 

I John 

Edward III of 1350-1364 

England | 

Charles V 

I 364-1 380 

Charles VI 
1380-1422 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 369 

line and could not be transmitted by a woman.* The nearest 
heir by male descent was the son of a brother of Philip IV, who 
was recognized as Philip VI. In 1329 Edward III did homage 
to Philip VI for the duchy of Guienne. This amounced to a 
recognition of the new king. Now, some years later, the Eng- 
lish revived the claims of Edward III, but it was evidently more 
of a pretext for war than a cause. 

Another occasion for hostility between England and France 
was found in the situation of the Flemish towns. The cities 
of Flanders, such as Ghent, Bruges, and Ypres, were great 
trading and industrial centres. Their location on 
Flemish or near the mouths of the Rhine made them natu- 

ral distributing points for northern Europe. The 
dons'^'^th^ Baltic trade reached them through northern Ger- 
Engiand. many; the Rhine brought to their docks goods 
from central and southern Germany, from Italy, 
and the eastern markets reached by the Italian traders; Eng- 
land sent them not only wool fleeces but also Bordeaux wine 
from the duchy of Guienne. The English trade was especially 
important to the Flemish towns; for their chief industry was 
weaving cloth from the English wool, and they exchanged their 
cloths and tapestries for the products which they received from 
other lands. 

It was quite in keeping with the character of the feudal age 
that there should be a standing quarrel between the cities and 

„ the count of Flanders. lust about this time the 

o., 74. ... 

differences had led to actual war, in which the king 

Makes an of France had aided the count. The Flemish cities 
with^he thereupon formed a league and sought the alliance 
Flemish of Edward III, who gladly accorded it. In the 

first years of the war Flanders constituted the Eng- 
lish base for operations in northern France, until the capture 
of Calais in 1347 gave them a still nearer port. 

Few sections of mediaeval history are as familiar to the gen- 

* This principle of succession came to be known as the "Salic law," 
because the French lawyers cited among other precedents the old law 
of the Salian Franks in regard to inheritance of land. 



^ 



370 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

eral reader as the first part of the Hundred Years' War. Jean. 
Froissart, a Flemish knight, who was attached to the EngUsh 
The Chron- court and who took part in the events, wrote a 
icleof chronicle of the times which has been a popular 

Froissart. i i • • 

story-book ever since. Froissart was a court poet; 

it was the romantic, the adventurous, and the 
picturesque which caught his eye. It is he who tells the- famil- 
iar stories of the exploits of the Black Prince, King Edward's 
son, and of the brave English knight, Sir John Chandos, and of 
^ . , ^ the French hero, Bertrand du Guesclin. From him 

Incidents. . . i . r i i * 

we get the mterestmg details of the battle of Crecy: 
how the French knights charged without order and were shot 
down by the stout English archers; how the blind king of Bo- 
hemia demanded to be led into the thick of the fight and was 
found after the battle in a heap of the slain; how King Edward 
refused to send reinforcements to the Black Prince when he was 
hard pressed, in order that the young warrior might win his 
spurs. His also is the familiar tale of the burghers of Calais 
who came out with ropes around their necks, to offer themselves 
as victims to the wrath of Edward, in order to save the rest 
of the citizens of the besieged city, and how they were spared 
through the pleading of the queen. The chronicle of Froissart 
was one of the earliest books to be printed. It was early trans- 
lated into English and has been a source of interest and enter- 
tainment to every succeeding generation. 

War was declared in 1337, but for several years there was no 
serious fighting. Edward made two or three raids into north- 
ern France, starting from Flanders, but withdrew each time 
Crecy 1346 before encountering the French forces. In 1340 the 

English won a naval battle off Sluys on the Flemish 
R., i, 197. coast which gave them control of the channel. The 
■' '^ ' first real battle was fought in 1346. In the sum- 

mer of that year Edward III landed with a considerable force 
in Normandy and advanced to the lower Seine. Moving up 
that river toward Paris he found the way blocked by a much 
larger French force and was compelled to retreat. Unable 
to go back through Normandy, he crossed the Seine and re- 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 371 

treated north toward the -coast. The French, hurrying after, 
came up with the English near the town of Crecy. A 
battle occurred here in which the English defeated a greatly 
superior French army, largely because of the skill of the Eng- 
lish archers. The one important result of the battle of Crecy 

was the capture of the coast town of Calais. Ed- 
Caiaisri347- ^^^^ ^ invested the city and after a siege of nearly 

a year it surrendered (1347). This was the near- 
est French port to England, and the English used it henceforth 
as the basis of their operations in northern France. Calais 
remained in English hands for over two centuries, long after 
they had lost the rest of their French lands. 

After the fall of Calais, hostilities were interrupted by a 
truce, which was prolonged for several years by the great 
plague known as the Black Death. In 1355 Edward's son, 
„ .^. , the Black Prince, made a raid from Bordeaux 

Poitiers, 1356. ' 

through the southern provinces of France. The 
next year he set out again from Bordeaux and 
marched north toward the Loire with the intention of joining 
another English army invading from the north. A larger 
French force intercepted his march, however, and forced 
him to fight near Poitiers (September, 1356). Once again, 
as at Crecy, the undisciplined feudal array of the French 
was beaten by the small organized English army. The day 
was disastrous for the French; a great many nobles fell on the 
field and King John of France (who had succeeded his father, 
Philip VI, in 1350) fell a prisoner into the hands of the Black 
Prince. The victor retired to Bordeaux and returned to 
England with his valuable captive. 

The defeat at Poitiers and the captivity of their king com- 
pelled the French to ask for a truce. The dauphin Charles, 
oldest son of King John, acted as regent during his father's 
Tro bl f 3,bsence, and his government encountered stormy 
French times. The "free companies," bands of hired sol- 

Government. ,. . . , r .^ ^ 

diers out of an occupation because of the truce, 
settled down on the land and devoured it. The peasants in the 
north, goaded to madness by their misery and by this added 



372 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

plague, armed themselves and murdered their landlords. The 
States General, meeting at Paris, hampered the government of 
the regent by demanding reforms and a share in the administra- 
tion. Etienne Marcel, the prevot of the merchants (the chief 
official of the city) headed a popular rising in Paris and sup- 
ported the demands of the States General. The government 
finally got the upper hand of these disturbances; the nobles 
crushed the peasant rising with great brutality, Marcel was 
abandoned by his partisans and assassinated in the streets 
of Paris, and the States General were pacified with vague prom- 
ises and sent home. These disorders had so weakened the 
French government, however, that it had to make peace. 
Terms were agreed on in the treaty of Calais, better 
Cakis (or known as the treaty of Bretigny (1360). By this 
^^60^^^^' treaty Edward III acquired the land south of the 
Loire that had once formed the duchy of Aquitaine, 
and also the city of Calais and the territory around it. He was 
to hold these in full sovereignty and not as a vassal of the king 
of France; thus the French surrendered about one-fifth of their 
land. In return Edward abandoned his pretensions to the 
French crown as well as the old claims to Normandy and other 
fiefs lost in the thirteenth century.* 

The dauphin Charles became King Charles V on the death 
of his father, in 1364. He is known among French kings as 
Charles the Wise, a title which he earned by his ability in mas- 
tering the disorders of the kingdom and in out- 
of Fra^nce. witting the English. He strengthened the royal 
government, kept the States General under con- 
trol, and built up the finances and the army. He put an end 
to the dispute in Flanders, which had given the English such 
an advantage during the first years of the war; he cleared the 
country of the ''free companies," enrolling some of them in the 

* King John of France, who had been captured at the battle of Poitiers 
and taken to England as a prisoner, was released on the signing of the 
treaty. He left hostages in England as security for the payment of 
his ransom; one of these was his son John, who later broke his pledge 
and fled from England. King John thereupon returned to England 
and gave himself up as a prisoner, remaining there in honorable cap- 
tivity until his death, in 1364. 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 373 

royal army and forcing the rest to seek employment elsewhere. 
Then, when he felt himself ready, he found an excuse for pro- 
voking the English to a renewal of the war. When 

The Black , i , . * • • 11. 

Prince in the nobles of Aquitame protested to him agamst the 

quitaine. administration of the Black Prince (who had been 

Renewal of invested with the duchy by his fathe,r), Charles V 

summoned the prince to come to his court and an- 
swer the charges. This was clearly a repudiation of the treaty 
of Bretigny, which had recognized the complete sovereignty of 
the English over Aquitaine, and Edward III replied by declar- 
ing war (1369). 

The fortunes of war were completely reversed in this part 
of the struggle. The important towns of Limoges, Rochelle, 
and Poitiers, in Aquitaine, revolted against the English and 

opened their gates to the French. Relieving forces 
Succises. from England wasted their men in futile invasions 

through a hostile country. Edward the Black Prince 
retired, worn out and ill, to England, where he died in 1376. 
By the end of the reign of Edward III, 1377, the French had 

recovered most of the land, the EngHsh holding out 
Period. "^^^ ^^7 ^^ certain strong towns on the coast, such as 

Bordeaux and Calais. The war virtually ceased 
with things in this state; for during the next forty years both 
countries were occupied with internal disturbances. 

One reason for the success of the French was the decline of 
the government of Edward III, who had sunk into his dotage 
and had allowed the government to be run by selfish nobles and 
D lin f unworthy favorites. Edward's son John of Gaunt, 
English duke of Lancaster, was the head of the clique that 

governed the aged monarch. The older son, Ed- 
ward the Black Prince, took the lead in a movement to reform 
the court, in which he was backed by Parliament. But the 
Black Prince was faihng in health; he died in 1376, the year 
before the death of his father. In 1377 Edward III passed 
away, to be succeeded by his grandson Richard, the ten-year- 
old son of the Black Prince. 

The reign of Richard II (13 77-1399) was full of disturbances. 
During his minority a council of regency ruled for him; the 



374 



EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 



principal event of these years was the peasants' rising of 1381, 
which is discussed later. After he came of age he ruled unwisely 

and the great nobles made this a pretext for at- 
1377-1399.' tacking him. In 1387 five of the leading nobles, 

including Richard's uncle, the duke of Gloucester, 
and his cousin Henry, son of John of Gaunt, made formal 
charges against him in Parliament. These lords are known as 
the "Lords Appellant." Parliament was under their control 
and did their bidding. The friends of Richard were banished 
or executed, and Richard was put under the control of a coun- 
cil composed of his accusers and enemies. He submitted for a 
time, and after two years was allowed to resume his inde- 
pendence. Richard never forgave the outrage visited on him 
by the Lords Appellant and Parliament, but for several years he 

bided his time. In 1397 he struck; he had his 
Quarrels with unclc, the dukc of Gloucester, arrested and secretly 
Great Nobles, p^t out of the Way, and banished the other Lords 

Appellant. He dissolved Parliament after com- 
pelling it to transfer its powers to a standing committee which 
he could control. His despotic rule was brief, however; in 
1399 his cousin Henry of Lancaster returned from exile to head 
a revolt, and Richard was defeated and forced to abdicate,* 

* Genealogy of the English kings in the first part of the Hundred 
Years' War: 

Edward III, 1327-1377 



1 

Edward, the 


1 
Lionel 


1 
Thomas, 


John of 


1 

Edmund, 


Black 






duke of 


Gaunt 


duke of 


Prince 






Gloucester 


1 
Henry IV 


York 


Richard II, 


Philippa, m. Ed- 




1399-1413, 




1377-1399 


mund Mortimer, 
earl of March 

Roger Mortimer 

Edmund Mortimer 
(representative of 
the older line, 




first king 
of Lancas- 
trian line 






passed ov( 


ir in 1399) 









THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 375 

The victorious faction called a Parliament which accepted the 
abdication of Richard and recognized Henry as king. This 
„ ,T Henry IV is the first of the Lancastrian line of 

Henry of Lan- '' 

caster Seizes kings. It should be noted, however, that he was 
one, 1399. ^^^ ^^ nearest heir to the throne after Richard, 
for there was a young prince descended from an older son of 
Edward III; this flaw in the Lancastrian title was to lead to 
civil war later. 

The century which ended with the abdication of Richard II 
and the accession of Henry IV was an important one in English 
history. Outwardly it appears as a period of unrest and vi- 
olence, but these disturbances are symptoms of the changes 
that everywhere in Europe were bringing in the new age. 

The powers of Parliament developed rapidly during the 
forty years from the beginning of the war in 1337 to the death 
of Edward III in 1377. Its control over taxation had become a 

real power. The expenses of the war caused Ed- 
ParUament ward III to ask Parliament for money nearly every 
ward'^in^ year. This brought about a series of bargainings 

between the king and the representatives of the 
nation. Parliament would grant the king the right to collect 
an income tax (a tenth or a fifteenth) or to levy indirect taxes 
on imports and exports, and in return it would suggest changes 
in the laws and reforms in the administration, which the king 
would graciously promise to take up with his council. Thus 
it acquired a direct influence over legislation. During this 
time also it acquired an influence over the policy of the king; 
for Edward III often discussed with it the plans for war and 
other important matters, in order to assure himself of its sup- 
port, and in later times Parliament considered that it had a 
right to be consulted. Finally Parliament acquired the right 
to call the king's officials to account for bad government. In 
1376, when Edward III was in his dotage and the government 
had fallen into evil hands, the "Good Parliament," under the 
lead of the Black Prince, brought charges against the king's 
ministers and favorites, condemned them, and had them pun- 
ished. This was the beginning of impeachments by Parlia- 



376 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ment. So in the reign of Edward III Parliament began to 
exercise those extensive powers which in their final form were 
to make it the controlling organ of the English government. 

The fourteenth century was a time of economic unrest, due 
to changes in agriculture and industry which upset traditional 
relations. The most striking movements were the peasants' ris- 
ings, which occurred in many parts of Europe in this 
Revolts. and the following century. In England this move- 

Causes ment culminated in the great peasants' revolt of 

138 1. The deeper causes are to be found in the 
transition from the manorial system, in which the relations of 
landlord and farm laborer were fixed by custom, to the wage 
system, in which the relations rested on a contract of hire. In 
the manorial system, which was virtually universal in the 
feudal age, the peasants were in the main serfs, born into a 
status or condition according to which they held a small piece 
of land on the payment of customary dues and the performance 
of a certain amount of labor for the lord. The serfs were not 
free to leave their land nor to dispose of their own labor. This 
„ . system was breaking down in the fourteenth cen- 

Passing -^ ° ^ 

away of tury, because of changes in methods of agriculture 

and the increase in the amount of currency. The 
lord found it to his advantage to hire laborers for a money 
wage and for a definite period; the serfs were allowed to free 
themselves from their customary services and restrictions by 
paying a money rent. Two results followed: serfdom tended 
to disappear, and a class of free laborers came into exist- 
ence. 
In the middle of the fourteenth century (1348) the Black 
, , Death swept over England and carried off from one- 

EffectSOfthe , . , , ,r r 1 1 • , • -rx , 

Black third to one-half of the working population. Herds 

^^ ' and flocks roamed un tended and crops rotted un- 

rii ^^' 6 gathered in the fields. When the landlords were 

ready to bid against one another for labor, wages 

■' ^ ■ automatically advanced; but to the landlord class 

it seemed that the laborers were taking inhuman advantage of 

the misery of the country. Since the landlords controlled the 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 377 

government, they tried to meet the demands of the laborers 
with legal compulsion. In 13 51 the king and Parliament en- 
acted the first Statute of Laborers, which gave the 
tweenLand- landlords the right to compel laborers to work for 
Laborers them at the wages current before the Black Death. 
It was impossible to enforce this sort of law, and 
the attempts of the landlords to do so drove the laborers to 
form associations or unions to resist. 

The Black Death also checked the movement which was 
causing serfdom to disappear. The scarcity of labor and the 
high wages demanded by the free laborers led the landlords to 
refuse to release their serfs from their customary obligation to 
labor on the lords' land. The serfs, on the other hand, were 
made more eager for freedom because of the high wages. Many 
of them fled from their lands, to turn up in other parts of the 
country as free laborers; the landlords secured legislation al- 
lowing them to pursue their runaway serfs and bring them back 
by force. 

This conflict between the landholding and the working classes 
continued for many years, until it came to an outbreak in 138 1. 
Other causes of discontent combined with this conflict to pre- 
cipitate the revolt. The democratic and critical 
1381. ° spirit, which had originated in the towns, was per- 
meating all society in the fourteenth century.* 
Popular preaching by the friars and the ''poor priests " of Wyclif 
called attention to the luxury and worldliness of the wealthy 
clergy and to the virtues of the simple folk. A sort of crude 
democracy appeared among peasant agitators, as expressed in 
the couplet: 

''When Adam delved and Eve span, 
Who was then the gentleman?" 

There was political discontent as well; the great nobles 
who governed the country during the decline of Edward III 

* This spirit is admirably shown in the poem of William Langland, 
The Vision of Piers Plowman, which pictures the misery of the poor 
laborers, the heartlessness of the nobles, and the corruption and worldli- 
ness of the clergy. 



378 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and the minority of Richard II ruled corruptly and ex- 
travagantly. A feeling was abroad among the peasants that 

they were being taxed heavily for a vicious and 
. * incompetent government, and this feeling was cul- 

tivated by popular ballads and satires. The crisis came in 
138 1, when the officials tried to collect a new poll tax levied 
by Parliament on all classes. Local resistance to tax-col- 
lectors swelled into a revolt against the ruling class and the 
government. In many districts there were local riots, in 
which the peasant sacked *and burned manor houses and 

murdered agents and landlords, but the striking 
London. ^^^^ feature of the revolt was the march of an army of 

peasants and townsmen on London. For several 
days they held and terrorized the city, burning and sacking 
palaces and murdering hated officials. 

Richard II, a youth of fifteen, showed at this crisis a courage 
and good sense that make his later failure even more tragic. 
He rode out to meet the rebels with a small following, listened 
R' h d II ^^ their demands for relief from oppressive laws, and 
and the promised to see to it that their grievances should 

be righted. A quarrel arose, however, and one of 
the kings' followers struck down Wat Tyler, the popular leader 
of the peasants. The young king averted the danger of a fight 
by riding forward among the angry peasants and declaring him- 
self their leader and friend. Pacified by his promises, most of 
the peasants left London and returned to their homes. Rich- 
ard's regents, however, failed to carry out his promises of re- 

dress and pardon. The rebels were hunted down 

and executed, and the objectionable laws were en- 
forced as before. Serfdom, however, was dying a natural 
death, because of changed social and economic conditions, and 
before many years it had virtually disappeared in England. 

Another mark of the new age was the emergence of a national 
language and a national literature. As we have noticed already, 
the Norman conquest had brought in a foreign language, French, 
which was for a long time the language of literature, of the ruling 
class, and of public afifairs. English continued to be spoken by 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 379 

the mass of the people, but very Httle Hterature appeared in it. 
By the end of the thirteenth century, after more than two hun- 
dred years of common hfe, the two races had amal- 
ofTa^uage!^ gamated to form a single English people; this 
process was favored especially by the growth of 
a national government under Henry II and Edward I. As 
a result there grew up a single national language, the basis of 
which was the old English speech, but which contained a large 
element of Norman-French. Since the decline of Anglo-Saxon 
literature, the native speech, unrestrained by a standard literary 
form, had changed very rapidly. It was not the old literary 
language of Wessex, but the popular dialect of the midland or 
old Mercian region, which emerged as the national language 
of England, with a considerable proportion of words adopted 
from the Norman French. This language is known 
English. ^s Middle English, to characterize its position be- 

tween Old English, or Anglo-Saxon, and Modern 
English, the language since the age of Shakespeare. Its posi- 
tion as a literary language was fixed at the end of the fourteenth 
century by its use in certain writings such as the poetry of 
Geoffroy Chaucer and the translation of the Bible by John 
Wyclif. 

The religious movement connected with the name of Wyclif 
is a further evidence of the change from mediaeval conditions 
that was making itself felt in the fourteenth century. In fact, 
the position taken by Wyclif was essentially that 
RevSt^^f of the Protestant leaders, like Luther and Calvin, 
d^^sY^^^^' ^^^ headed the revolt from the church in the six- 
teenth century. Wyclif began by writing in de- 
fense of the national government against the pretensions of 
the papacy. This was the period of the ''Babylonian Cap- 
tivity," the time when the papal court, located at Avignon, 
Attacks ^^^ under French influence. This fact, coupled 

Papal with the abuses in papal administration, had led to 

wide-spread criticism of the papacy. This was 
especially strong in England, where it was felt that the large 
sums of money raised for the popes by the selling of indulgences 



38o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and other methods were being used against England. Under 
Edward III the government had enacted the statute of Pro- 
visors, forbidding the pope to appoint churchmen to rich offices 
in the EngHsh church, and the statute of Praemunire, for- 
bidding the carrying of appeals from the English church courts 
to the papal court. 

In defense of national government Wyclif denied the su- 
perior authority of the pope, and declared that civil govern- 
ments derived their powers as directly from God as did the 
ecclesiastical. From this he was led to deny the 
tacks Secular ^^S^^ ^^ ^^^ church to exercisc secular powers and 
Powers of to question the right of the clergy to own land and 
property. Then he went further to attack abuses in 
toScrip^Ses. the church and to reject certain fundamental doc- 
trines. Finally he took the position that the 
Scriptures constituted the only authority for doctrines and 
church government. Nor was he content to stop with a crit- 
icism of the papacy and the church; he sought to institute 
a new religious movement in line with these ideas. He trans- 
rr , ^ lated the Bible into English and wrote many tracts 

Translates ^ ^ ... 

the Bible in- in English to appeal to public opinion; he founded 
an order of popular preachers, known as "poor 
priests," to spread his ideas among the common people. It 
seems strange that he could carry his attack on the church so 
far without being suppressed as a heretic; but the papacy was 
in trouble everywhere at this time, Wyclif had powerful sup- 
porters at court, and national feeling in England was for the 
moment hostile to the papacy. In any event, Wyclif con- 
tinued his work to the end of his life, in 1384. 

Thus the end of the fourteenth century in England, as every- 
where, was marked by the stirrings of a new age. Mediaeval 
institutions and conditions were beginning to break down and 
to give way to newer forms in every field: political. 
Passing Av^ay. social, religious, and intellectual. Feudalism was 
passing away before the growth of a strong national 
monarchy, serfdom was disappearing, freedom of thought was 
beginning. It was to be a long time yet before these tendencies 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— FIRST PART 381 

riumphed; but the events .we have noted — the growth of 
Parliament, the peasants' revolt, the new national language 
nd literature, and Wyclif's movement — are prophetic of the 
uture. 



CHAPTER XX 
THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 

As we saw in the preceding chapter, the first period of the 
Hundred Years' War came to an end with the virtual expulsion 

of the English from French soil. An English 
the End of force Still held Calais, but of the great duchy of 
PCTiod?i377. Aquitaine which had been ceded to England in 

the treaty of Bretigny there remained in her hands 
only a narrow strip of land on the coast, with the important 
city of Bordeaux. 

The victory of France had been due directly to a revi- 
val of national force under the vigorous rule of Charles the 
Wise (Charles V, 1364-1380). It had been due partly, of 

course, to the weakness of the English government 
TrouSes^in during the declining years of Edward HI. For 
England, nearly forty years after his death, in 1377, the Eng- 
lish government was prevented from undertaking 
I377-I399-' seriously a foreign war by continued disturbances 

at home. The minority of Richard II had been 
troubled by popular discontent and agitation, which culminated 
in the peasants' revolt of 1381. As soon as he came of age he 
became involved in conflicts with the powerful barons and with 
Parliament; and his reign ended in dvil war and his deposition, 

in 1399. Henry IV (1399-1413), the first of the 
139^^1413. Lancastrian kings, had to face several revolts, which 

threatened to unseat him. In 1400 he defeated a 
conspiracy to kill him and restore Richard II; the only result 
of this was to cause the disappearance of that unhappy mon- 
arch, who was secretly executed in prison. Then the Welsh 
rose under a native prince, Owen Glendower, and for years in 
their mountainous districts maintained a stubborn resistance 
to the armies of Henry IV. The Welsh were joined by a power- 

382 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 383 

ful faction of the nobles, headed by the great families of Percy 
(earls of Northumberland) and Mortimer (earls of March), 
who professed to be fighting for the rightful heir to the crown, 
the young Edmund Mortimer, earl of March.* Henry IV finally 
got the better of these revolts and conspiracies, and spent the 
last few years of his reign in comparative peace, but he died 
still in the prime of life, in 1413. 

It was his son and successor, Henry V (1413-1422), who 
renewed the war with France. A young man, eager for mili- 
tary glory and rightly reckoning that a successful foreign war 
Henry V would put an end to factional opposition to the 
(1413-1422) Lancastrian rule, he immediately made known his 

Declares . . ... 

War on intention of reviving the claim to the French 

crown and making war on France. Parliament 
met him half-way, asserting his title to the throne of France 
and voting him a large grant of money for the war. 

The eagerness of the English to renew the war with France 
was prompted by the unhappy state of that kingdom. Since 
the death of Charles the Wise in 1380 the government had 
fallen on evil times. His son Charles VI was a mere 
in France child when he succeeded, and his minority was the 
Vi^is^-iS occasion for quarrels among the princes of the 
royal family as to who should control the govern- 
ment. To make matters worse, Charles VI, after he grew up, 
developed fits of insanity which periodically incapacitated 

* The following genealogy shows the title of the earl of March and 
the connections of the Mortimers, Percys, and Owen Glendower: 

Edward III (1327-1377) 

\ , 

! \ 1 

Edward the Black Prince Lionel John of Gaunt 

I I I 

Richard II Philippa m. Edm. Mortimer Henry IV 

I earl of March 

I i 1 

Roger Edmund Mortimer Elizabeth 

m. daughter of m. Henry 

Owen Glendower Percy, son 

Edm. Mortimer of earl of 

earl of March Northumberland 



384 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

him for ruling. The factional struggles in the court were thus 
prolonged until they developed into civil war. These factions 
had formed around the king's brother, Louis, duke of Orleans, 
and the king's cousin, John, duke of Burgundy. In 1407 the 
o ,. duke of Orleans had been murdered at the instiga- 

Burgundians ^ ° 

and tion of the duke of Burgundy, and the son of the 

murdered man took up the quarrel more bitterly 
than ever. The party of the young duke of Orleans was led 
by his father-in-law, the count of Armagnac, a powerful noble 
of the south of France; from him the party received the name 
of the Armagnacs. Not only the court, but the country at large 
was divided between Burgundians and Armagnacs, and France 
was torn by civil war at the very moment when the king of 
England was preparing to invade the country. 

In the summer of 141 5 Henry V sailed from England with 

a considerable force and landed in Normandy. The siege of 

Harfleur at the mouth of the Seine detained him for several 

weeks, and the gathering of the French forces com- 

HenryVIn- „ , , . ., , , 

vades France, pelled him to Strike north by the shortest route 
^'^^^' along the coast for the English stronghold of Calais. 

A^"^^2rt^ "^^ found his way blocked by a greatly superior 
French army at the town of Agincourt, not far from 
the battlefield of Crecy. Once again, as at Crecy and Poitiers, 
the English proved their superiority in the field. The large 
French army was defeated and routed, and the English made 
good their withdrawal to Calais. 

In 141 7 Henry V made a second expedition into France. 
Landing again in Normandy, he set out deliberately to conquer 
the province. For two years he was engaged in this task, un- 
til the surrender of its chief town, Rouen, in 1419, 

Second Inva- , . 

sion, 1417; put the whole of Normandy in his hands. In the 
Normamiy, meantime the struggle between the Burgundians 
^'^^^' and Armagnacs continued unabated. The Bur- 

Civil War gundians had entered Paris in force, seizing the 
king and massacring the Armagnac nobles. The 
dauphin (the oldest son of the king) now became the leader of 
the Armagnac forces, which prepared to revenge their defeat. 



^^ . ^^^ Ghent 




The dates under some of 
the names are those of 
battle, treaties, oi- other 
important events which 
ocfurred at these phiets 



Longitude 



Greenwich 



XVI 

FRANCE DURING THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR 

Note to Map XVI. — This shows the extent of the lands ceded to Ed- 
ward III in the treaty of Calais (or Bretigny), 1360. Notice the two small 
territories in the north which were ceded also. In the later part of the 
war, these were all recovered by the French, except Calais, Note the 
advance into the Rhone valley by the acquisition of Dauphine (1349); 
this was carried further by the acquisition of Provence under Louis XI 
(see Map XVII). Use this map for locating the events of the Hundred 
Years' War; the dates given on the map are those of events (treaties, 
battles, etc.) occurring at these places. 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 385 

If France were not to fall an easy prey to the foreign invader, 
the war of the factions must be ended. At the solicitation of 
the leading clergy and officials, the duke of Burgundy and the 

dauphin consented to a conference. They met, 
the Duke of ^ach attended by a few followers, on a bridge at the 
Burgundy, ^^^^ ^f Monterey near Paris, but the upshot of the 

interview was the murder of the duke of Burgundy 
by the followers of the dauphin. 

This murder completed the disruption of France. The new 
duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, son of the murdered man, 
openly joined the English with all his lands and forces. This 
The Burgun- K^^^ Henry V possession of the person of the king 

dian Party a^d of the city of Paris, with a large part of north- 
joins the '' ' . 
English. ern France. The helpless, half-mad king, Charles 

Treaty of VI, was induced to sign the treaty of Troyes (1420), 
Troyes, 1420. -p^^hich disinherited his son and recognized Henry V 
Death of as regent of France and heir to the French throne, 
and of Henry Two years later both of these kings were dead, 
,1422. Charles VI old and imbecile, Henry V in the prime 

of his age and vigor. Henry VI, an infant son of Henry V, less 
than a year old, was left to inherit the two crowns of England 
and France. 

The struggle continued between the followers of the dauphin, 
who was recognized by them as the rightful heir to the throne, 
and the English and Burgundians, supporting the claims of 
Henry VI. In time French national feeling would 
therJauphin. ^^ necessity rally about the dauphin, but in 1422 his 
prospects were not bright. The parlement of Paris 
cesses; Siege had accepted the infant Henry VI as king of France, 
1428. •' ^^^ English rule was being established over north- 
ern France by the wise and vigorous measures of 
his uncle and guardian, the duke of Bedford. By 1428 the Eng- 
lish had control of all of the land north of the Loire except the 
city of Orleans and they were already besieging that stronghold. 
It was at this juncture, when things looked darkest for the 
dauphin and the national interests of France, that the French 
found a leader and an inspiration. This was the young peasant 



386 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

girl of Lorraine, Jeanne d'Arc (Joan of Arc, as the English called 
her). The forces which inspired her remarkable career were a 

simple popular faith and a sorrow for the sufferings 
d'Arc. of the country. She had waking visions, which we 

Her Visions ^^^^ ^^^ doubt Were realities to her, of the saints, 
MiisSn ^^* Michael the archangel and St. Catherine, and 

heard voices commanding her to lead the dauphin 
to Rheims to be crowned. Rheims was by long tradition 
the place of the consecration and coronation of the kings 
of France; at this time it was in the hands of the English. 
The voices became so insistent that she had to obey. Leaving 
her home secretly, she made her way to the court of the dauphin 
at Chinon, where he and his counsellors were awaiting in uncer- 
tainty and indecision the fate of Orleans. There she convinced 
the dauphin and the sceptical courtiers of the supernatural 

character of her call. They intrusted her with a 
Orfeans.^^^^ Small forcc of soldiers with which she succeeded in 

making her entry into the besieged city. Her con- 
fidence inspired the despairing forces within the town. On 
horseback and in armor she led them in sallies against the 
English and forced them to abandon the siege. Then she took 
A d L d ^^^ -^^^^ ^^ ^^^ head of her troops and cleared the 
the Dauphin English out of the eastern lands and opened the way 

to Rheims. There, in July, 1429, the dauphin was 
crowned as Charles VII. 

The mission of the maid was accomplished, but the king per- 
suaded her to remain with the army. The French now ad- 
vanced on Paris; at Compiegne, in a battle with the Burgundian 
^ -^ , forces, Jeanne d'Arc was cut off from the main body 

J eanne Made ' ** '' 

Prisoner. and made prisoner. The Burgundians turned her 
Ch., 176. over to the English, who had her tried as a witch 
And Burned before an ecclesiastical court. Even under torture 
as a Witch, her testimony revealed only her simple faith in her 
mission and her devotion to France. She was con- 
demned and burned at the stake in May, 143 1.* 

* Some years later, in 1456, the sentence of witchcraft and heresy 
was revoked by an ecclesiastical court held in France with the consent 
of the pope. The French have always revered her memory as that of 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 387 

Her larger mission, the rousing of France, was also accom- 
plished. From the time of her appearance, the tide ran stead- 
ily against the English. In 1435 the duke of Burgundy returned 

to his allegiance, and the same year the English 
Successes. duke of Bedford died, leaving the conduct of the 

war to less skilful hands. In 1436 the city of Paris 
was recovered from the English. The Enghsh still held Nor- 
mandy, won by Henry V, and their old possessions in the south 
around Bordeaux. In the next few years these also were wrested 
from their grasp. In 1450 Normandy was regained, and in 
1453 a desperate attempt of the English to recover Bordeaux, 
which had revolted, was defeated in the battle of Castillon and 
the south passed definitely out of their hands. During these 
later years of the war the factional struggle in England known 
as the War of the Roses was beginning to distract the govern- 
Th E d f ^^^t and prevent it from carrying on the foreign 
the War, war. The war ended without a formal treaty; in 

the modern period the kings of England were still 
to use the title of king of France and for a time in the sixteenth 

century were even to make occasional efforts to re- 
Settlement, cover some of the lands in France. In effect, how- 
ever, the issue was settled for good and all; of all 
their extensive holdings in France the English retained only 
the city of Calais and the Channel Islands. 

The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries constitute a period 
of transition from the mediaeval to the modern age. In political 
history this transition is marked by the sharper definition of 

national outlines and the growth of national rival- 
of^heHun- ries. The Hundred Years' War is an important 
War.^^'^^' phase of this movement. At bottom it had been 

produced by that confusion between private posses- 
sion and public government which was of the essence of f eudal- 

a national heroine and martyr; the English, however, long continued 
to regard her as a witch, as is shown by Shakespeare's characterization 
in Henry VI, Part I. In the nineteenth century the French clergy began 
an active campaign in tavor of her canonization. This has resulted in 
the pope issuing in 1908 the decree of beatification which gave her the 
title of Blessed, and in 1920 the decree of canonization which places 
her among the saints of the church. 



388 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ism as a political system. The kings of England had held 
lands in France as family possessions, but, since the possession 
of land carried with it in the feudal age a large measure of sover- 
eign authority over the land and the people on it, the kings of 
England had been virtual rulers of a considerable part of France. 
The outcome of the Hundred Years' War put an end to this 
confused situation. Henceforth the king of France, with no 
equal rival in his own land, was in a position to extend his 
authority as a national monarch over the national territory. 

The kings of England, on the other hand, were re- 
France Be-° leased from the distraction of their feudal lord- 
a?SteSsI''°''' ^^^P i^ France and the contests with the French 

monarchs which it had entailed, and became more 
definitely and clearly national monarchs of England. During 
the generation following the war, in both countries, acute in- 
ternal struggles occurred which resulted in the clearing up to a 
considerable degree of the confusion left over from the feudal 
stage of government and which prepared for the emergence at 
the end of the century of strong national states. 

In France the development of a strong national government 
followed necessarily, given the state of government and society 
in the fifteenth century, two main lines: (i) the concentration 
Decline of ^^ authority in the hands of the king, and (2) the 
Royal Author- reduction of the great feudal princes. As we have 

ity m France . ° i i t i 

during the Seen m a former chapter, there had been constant 

WT 

progress in the former line during the two centuries 
from the accession of Louis VI, in 1108, to the death of Philip IV, 
in 13 14. After that, however, more than a century of foreign 
war and civil strife had not only checked that progress but had 
caused actual retrogression. When, therefore, French successes 
enabled Charles VII, about 1440, to turn his attention to the 
work of building up the royal authority, he found serious ob- 
stacles in his way. 

Aside from the independence of the feudal princes, which we 
shall consider by itself later, the principal obstacle to royal 
power was the authority which had been acquired by the States 
General, and by similar representative bodies in the local prov- 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 389 

inces. The States General was the name given to a general 
assembly of representatives of the three principal "estates," or 

classes — clergy, nobles, and citizens. It had been 
tional Limit- Summoned first, it will be remembered, by Philip 
ations. jy^ j^ 1302, when he wished to assure himself of 

The States ^j^g support of the nation in his quarrel with the 

pope. During the Hundred Years' War the States 

General had been summoned frequently because the government 

needed its assent to the levying of taxes and subsidies for the 

heavy expenses of the war. Thus it had acquired a measure 

^ _ of control over the national revenues. In the f re- 

Its Powers. 

quent political crises of the fourteenth and fifteenth 

centuries the States General often sided with the parties of 
opposition and protested against the royal policy and de- 
manded reforms. 

In appearance, therefore, the States General occupied a 
position like that of the English Parliament. For obvious 
reasons, however, it was destined to have a very different his- 
tory. In the first place, it rested upon no such 
the^sTates solid foundation as the English Parliament pos- 
Reasons sessed in the self-governing shire-courts.* In the 

second place, the States General did not have the 
support of the nation. When the fortunes of France were at 
their lowest in both periods of the war, after 1360 and after 
1420, the revival of national feeling had shown itself in a rally- 
ing of the nation about the king, while the States General had 
seemed to hamper rather than to help in that revival by its 
opposition to the king. The policy of Charles VII, therefore, 
in virtually dispensing with the States General after 1439 was 
not really revolutionary and met no serious opposition. 

The decisive factor in the decline of the powers of the States 
Loses Con- General was its loss of control over the royal 
troi over finances. The main sources of revenue (aside from 
the royal lands) were the general direct tax, known 
as the taille, indirect taxes called aides, and the salt monopoly, 
or gabelle. For the levying of the taille and the aides the govern- 

* See p. 360 above. 



390 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ment had usually (but not always) asked the assent of the 
States General. After the meeting of 1439, which was the last 
time it was summoned during his reign, Charles VII continued 
to collect these taxes on his own authority, basing his demands 
on the need of revenues to complete the conquest of French 
territory from the enemy. In its enthusiasm for the war the 
nation paid without protest. From that time on the king and 
his council determined how much revenue was needed and 
levied taxes accordingly without other authorization. 

The legislative powers of the States General were irregular 
and spasmodic in their exercise. On occasions the government 
had asked its authorization for new measures and laws. On 
T T* other occasions the States General had demanded 

Loses Its 

Legislative reforms or the redress of grievances. It did not 
participate regularly in the making of laws, as the 
English Parliament did in the fashioning of the statutes. With 
its loss of financial powers and the greater infrequency of its 
meetings, the States General lost even its occasional cortrol 
over legislation. Henceforth legislation in France took the 
form of the issuing of edicts by the king with the advice of his 
officials and council. 

In many of the provinces of France there were local assemblies 
of the three estates, which had also acquired considerable 
powers during the period of the war. In some cases they met 
p • • IE annually to apportion the share of the taxes among 
tates; Their the classes and communities of the province, and 

Powers. 

even ventured occasionally to refuse to pay as much 
as had been assigned to the province. They also petitioned the 
king in regard to the bad administration of his officials or de- 
manded reforms in the laws. In some provinces the estates 
exercised a certain measure of local authority, le\ying taxes 
for local needs and controlling certain local affairs. The pro- 
vincial estates, however, declined very rapidly after 1450. In 
many provinces they simply ceased to meet. Where they did 
persist they were shorn of their independence; their powers 
were confined to the formal assenting to the levy of taxes de- 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 391 

manded from the province- by the royal council and to the 

apportioning of this to the subdivisions. 

Thus the constitutional limitations upon the power of the 

king disappeared in France after the middle of the fifteenth 

century. The government of France in principle was an ab- 

Govemment solute monarchy; to make it such in fact required 

of France the development of an effective centralized admin- 
Absolute but 
not Strongly istration, and that development was not to occur 

for a long time yet. The actual power exercised by 
the king, therefore, depended to a considerable extent upon the 
personal qualities of the monarch; under Charles VII it was 
much less than under his shrewd, active, and unscrupulous son, 
Louis XL 

The monarchy had still to fight a hard battle with the great 
feudal nobles. The weakness of the government during long 
periods of the war had enabled the princes to acquire great 

independence. As we have seen, the older lines of 
Charles VII feudal princes had for the most part disappeared 
vdththe^ before the beginning of the war, through the ab- 
Feudai sorption of the great fiefs by the crown; of these 

there were left only the duke of Brittany and a few 
nobles of southern France, such as the counts of Foix and of 
Armagnac. The powerful lords with whom Charles VII and 
Louis XI had to struggle in order to establish royal authority 
Origin of the Were of later origin; they were descendants of 
Feudal younger sons and brothers of former kings, who had 

Princes from ^ , i • , \ i 

theR-oyal been endowed with fiefs (appanages) by the reign- 
ing monarchs from the crown lands. The greatest 
of these princes at this time was the duke of Burgundy, holding 
from the king of France not only that duchy but also the coun- 
ties of Flanders and Artois, and from the emperor the ''free 
county" of Burgundy (Franche Comte) and the Netherlands. 
Other powerful lords were: the duke of Bourbon, the duke of 
Orleans, the duke of Anjou, and the duke of Alengon. Dur- 
ing the first part of the fifteenth century, when the central gov- 
ernment was powerless, these lords acted almost as sovereign 



392 



EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 



princes and each family sought its own aggrandizement at the 
expense of the royal power.* 

The revival of the monarchy threatened the independence of 
these great princes and produced a series of coalitions and re- 
volts against Charles VII and Louis XI. These coalitions 
F d 1 c ali- ^^*^^^^ solidarity; each prince was seeking his own 
tions against advantage. Moreover, the national forces were on 

Charles VII 

the side of the monarchy and the kings eventually 
triumphed. Charles VII had to face three or four such coali- 
tions between 1437 and 1442; he got the better of them, but 
his last years were embittered by the rebellion of his son and 
heir, the dauphin Louis, who acted as if he could not wait for 
his father's death to enter upon authority. 

Louis XI came to the throne on the death of his father in 
1461. The feudal princes, who, because of his earlier acts. 



* The following table shows diagrammatically the origin of the feudal 
princes of the age of Charles VII and Louis XI : 

Louis IX 



Philip III 



Phi 



IpIV 



Charles 
of Valois 



I \ 1 

Louis X Philip V Charles IV 



Philip VI 

I 
John 



Charles of 
Alenfon 



Charles V 



Louis of Philip of 
Anjou Burgundy 



Charles VI Louis 

of Orleans 
Charles VII I 



Louis XI Orleans Anjou Burgundy Alengon Bourbon 



Robert of Bourbon 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 393 

counted on finding an easy master in him, were soon undeceived. 
No monarch more greedy of power ever occupied the throne 

of France, and none more tireless in his efforts to 
1461-1483, encompass it. A contemporary ballad gave him 
sal^SiSer^''^' ^^^ name of the ''universal spider," a fitting title, 

with its suggestion of slyness, rapacity, and cal- 
culating patience. He succeeded in his enterprises not by 
armies and violence, but by intrigue, treachery, and cun- 
ning. 

Early in his reign Louis XI had to face a formidable coali- 
tion of the princes, which included his own brother, the duke of 
Berry, the dukes of Brittany, Alengon, and Bourbon, and the 
The "Lea u ^^^ ^^ ^^ duke of Burgundy. The forces of the 
of Public coalition were stronger than any the king could 

muster, and he was defeated and forced to make 
concessions. These concessions show what the nobles were 
fighting for. They had taken up arms under the name of the 
*' League of Public Welfare" and professed to be fighting for 
reforms and freedom of the people from oppression. Nothing 
of this appeared in the demands of the nobles, which were for 
pensions, privileges, offices, and fiefs for themselves. Once 
determined to make peace, Louis XI conceded all that they 
asked with a free hand, and then set about breaking up the 
coalition and preparing to take away again what he had 
given. 

The conflict with the feudal princes took on a new character 
after Charles the Bold succeeded to the title of duke of Bur- 
gundy. In 1467 Philip the Good died; he was that duke of 
c nfl' t "th ^^^g^^^^y who had gone over to the English in 
Charles the 14 19 and had returned to his allegiance to Charles 
Burgundy. VII in 1 43 5. He was succeeded by his son Charles, 
The Burgun- '^^^ bears the title of Charles the Bold. The duke 
dian Terri- of Burgundy was the lord of territories constituting 

almost an independent kingdom. In addition to 
the duchy of Burgundy, he held from the king of France the 
county of Flanders and other fiefs in the north, and from the 
emperor the "free county" of Burgundy (Franche Comte) and 



394 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

a whole group of territories just north of the French frontier 
in the region known as the Netherlands (modern Holland and 
Belgium). 

With these great resources the dukes of Burgundy had been 
able to treat with the kings of France almost as equals; it was 
the ambition of Charles the Bold to achieve complete inde- 
. , , . pendence and equality by erecting his territories 

Ambitious 7 1 • 1 m^-, - ^ r i • • 

Projects of mto a separate kmgdom. This lofty ambition 
the^Bold. involved him in wide-reaching negotiations of inter- 
„. „ , national scope. To prevent Louis XI from inter- 

xlis ocnenies. 

fering with his plans he tried to keep alive the feudal 
revolts, and made an alliance with Edward IV of England, who 
agreed to make war on France. To secure the intervening lands 
between the two Burgundies and the Netherlands he bought 
up the rights of the Hapsburg lords to the county of Alsace and 
tried to induce the duke of Lorraine to put the control of that 
duchy into his hands. To secure the title of king he tried to 
draw the emperor Frederick III into his schemes. These nego- 
tiations were too complicated for the hasty and impolitic tem- 
perament of Charles the Bold; moreover, he had in Louis XI 
an antagonist of immensely superior skill in the game of di- 
plomacy. 

Louis XI easily triumphed over the later feudal revolts. He 
kept Edward IV of England occupied by supporting the earl 
of Warwick in his revolt and helping to restore the Lancastrian 
Louis XI party. When Edward finally, in 1475, invaded 
Foils His France, Charles the Bold was engaged in a futile 

campaign among the Rhine princes, and Louis had 
little difficulty in persuading the English monarch to with- 
draw for a round sum of money. The projects of Charles in 
^ ,, , Alsace and Lorraine aroused the apprehensions 

Death of . . 

Charles the of the lesser German princes and of the Swiss 
° ' ^"^ ' Confederation, and Louis encouraged them to form 
a league for defense. This brought about the ruin of Charles 
the Bold. In 1477, in battle with the Swiss and the other allies 
at Nancy, in Lorraine, he met defeat and death. 
Louis was not able to gather in, as he had hoped, all of the 



Note to Map XVII. — This shows the possessions of Charles the Bold, 
duke of Burgundy. They are in two groups: a southern group consisting 
of the duchy of Burgundy in France and the county of Burgundy (Franche 
Comte) in the empire; a northern group composed of Flanders and other 
fiefs, partly in France and partly in the empire. It was the aim of Charles 
to unite his possessions by acquiring Alsace and the duchy of Lorraine, and 
to have them recognized by the emperor as an independent kingdom. Note 
the further expansion of France in the Rhone valley by the acquisition of 
the county of Provence. 



f 



Lon-jituile East 4 from 

I 



Green wirh 8 



XV 1.1 

POSSESSIONS OF 
CHARLES THE BOLD 



f^^^'"S^^% 




seilles 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 395 

rich inheritance of the dukes of Burgundy. Mary of Burgundy, 
daughter of Charles the Bold, had married Maximilian, arch- 

duke of Austria, of the Hapsburg family, heir of 
dian inheri- the emperor Frederick III. Maximilian defended 

the interests of his wife and, after some years of 
bu^f Acquire ^^^^Sg^^j Louis was forced to recognize his right 
the Nether- to the Netherlands, Franche Comte, and other fiefs 

lying outside of France. Louis acquired for the 
crown, however, the duchy of Burgundy and certain other 
French fiefs. The Netherlands became part of the vast family 

empire of the Hapsburgs, which came, in the genera- 
qmres the tion after Louis XI, into the hands of the emperor 
Burgundy Charles V; they were to be a constant source of 

conflict between France and the Hapsburg powers 
of Spain and Austria. 

The defeat of Charles the Bold marked the final triumph of 
Louis XI over the feudal princes. Fortune and cunning enabled 
him to reap a rich harvest of fiefs made vacant by death or con- 
Other Acqui- fiscation. In addition to Burgundy he added to 
sitions of the crown land the fiefs of his brother the duke of 

Louis XI. 

Berry, of the duke of Alen^on, and of the duke of 
Anjou. The latter included not only Anjou and 
Maine in France, but also the county of Provence, which be- 
longed nominally to the empire. Adding this to the crown 
land meant virtually incorporating it into the territory of 
France. In this connection we must pause to notice the process 
by which French influence and control were being extended 
beyond the mediaeval frontiers of France. 

France was bounded on the east along its whole extent by 
lands belonging to the empire. Geographically these consti- 
tuted three groups: the lower Rhine lands, comprising the 
French Ex- Netherlands, the middle Rhine territories of Lor- 
pansion raine and Alsace, and the Rhone valley. In the 

later Middle Age the ties which bound these lands 
to the empire were of the loosest sort, and they tended to gravi- 
tate toward the stronger and more compact nation of France, 
The external evidence of this drift toward France was the way 



396 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

in which French noble families acquired fiefs in these regions; 
we have seen illustrations of this in the cases of the Netherlands, 
Lorraine, Franche Comte, and Provence. This was a step 
toward their incorporation into the French nation. 

Within the limits of the Middle Age this process had already 
gone very far in the case of the Rhone valley. In the early 
period this region had constituted the independent kingdom of 
Aries or Burgundy, lying between France, Germany, 
Vafley. ^^^ ^^^ Italy. It had been added to the empire in the 
eleventh century, but the failure of the imperial 
government had resulted in this region breaking up into vir- 
tually independent little principalities. The chief of these 
were the county of Provence, the county of Vienne, or Dau- 
phine, the county of Burgundy, or Franche Comte, and the 
duchy of Savoy. Dauphine had been left by the 
will of the last count, in 1349, to the oldest son of 
the king of France, and since that time the heir to the French 
throne had regularly borne the title of dauphin and held this 
fief. Franche Comte had come into the possession 
Comt6. of the French dukes of Burgundy, but, as we have 

Provence J^^^ Seen, it escaped the grasp of Louis XI by being 
drawn into the Hapsburg possession. Provence was 
acquired by Louis XI as part of the inheritance of the house of 
Anjou. The dukes of Savoy were related by mar- 
riage to the French royal line, but their future was 
bound to Italy rather than to France. By the acquisition 
of Dauphine and Provence the Rhone became a French river. 
The extension of French political influence over Franche Comte, 
Alsace and Lorraine, which would bring the French frontier 
up to the Rhine, was the great aim of ambitious French rulers 
in the modern period. 

Louis XI died in 1483, leaving the French monarchy stronger 
^ , , than it had been at any time since the beginning 

Death of -^ i • 

Louis XI, of French national history. It was far from bemg 
^"^ ^* a well-organized state in the modern sense, but the 

tireless activities of the king had made his authority felt every- 
where. He called the States General but once during his 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 397 

reign. His personal agents, of high or low degree, lorded it 
over feudal nobles, provincial estates, and city governments. 

The spirit of resistance in the great feudal princes 
His Rule. was broken. Of the lines that were left, that of 
Triumph of Brittany was absorbed in the royal line by the 
MoJa'rchy^ marriage of the next king, Charles VIII, with the 

heiress of the dukes of Brittany, and that of Orleans 
came to the throne, after the death of Charles VIII, in the 
person of Louis XII. At the opening of the modern period 
the king of France was undisputed head of the government and 
lord of the country. 

In England the generation after the Hundred Years' War was 
a period of civil struggle, known as the "War of the Roses."* 
This was a struggle for the throne between two branches of 

the royal line, the Lancastrian and the Yorkist. 
theRos^'' As we have seen, the Lancastrian title was defective 
1455-1485. from the point of strict heredity. Henry IV had 
Origin of the seized the throne and had then secured the com- 
the Crov^.^'^ placent acquiescence of ParHament. In doing so, 

however, he had passed over the claims of an older 
line, represented by the young earl of March, who was descended 
from an older son of Edward III. These claims had now (by 
the middle of the fifteenth century) fallen by marriage to an- 
other branch of the royal line, that of the dukes of York. The 

popularity of Henry V and the national enthusiasm 
andYoridsts. ^roused by his successful war in France prevented 

the bringing forward of these claims; it was certain, 
however, that they would be revived if the Lancastrian rule 
should become unpopular. This situation was produced by the 
minority and the weak rule of Henry VI. 

* This name was invented by later chroniclers of the Tudor period, 
based on the supposition that the Yorkist and Lancastrian families 
used as emblems respectively the white and the red rose. The use of 
the red rose as a Lancastrian badge comes in with the Tudor family; 
the idea of the opposition of the roses seems to have been derived from 
the practice of the Tudor monarchs in adopting a double rose, red and 
white, to indicate that they had inherited both Yorkist and Lancastrian 
claims. 



398 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

There is another aspect to the War of the Roses which needs 
to be considered. It may be regarded as the last struggle of the 
great nobles against the growing power of the national govern- 
ment, and it corresponds in that respect to the con- 

The War of 

the Roses as tcmporaneous movement in France. Everywhere 
strueek ^^ western Europe feudalism as a system of govern- 
ment was disappearing; the great lords retained 
their social pre-eminence, their economic advantages in the 
ownership of land, and to a considerable extent their private 
jurisdiction over tenants and retainers; their political role was 
disappearing before the encroachments of the national royal 
Th Great government. In England there were a few great 
Barons in families, raised far above the ranks of the ordinary 
nobility by their possession of vast estates. This 
was the result of a concentration of lands and titles through 
intermarriage and inheritance that had been going on among 
the upper ranks since the middle of the fourteenth century. 
As in France, most of these families were connected with the 
royal line; their power, however, rested not upon the overlord- 
ship of whole provinces, but upon their landed wealth and the 
maintenance of armed bands of retainers, who wore the livery or 
badge of their lord and fought in his private quarrels. 

I rip f 3 cf* 

Struggle The battles of the War of the Roses were fought 
Barona e mainly by these forces, and the devastation in their 
ranks and the extinction of great families in the 
course of this bloody struggle broke the power of the higher 
nobility. In this sense, then, the War of the Roses is the last 
gasp of the feudal nobility in England. 

We may pass rather rapidly over the incidents in the struggle. 
Henry VI was less than a year old when in 1422 he succeeded to 
the claims of his father to the thrones of England and of France. 
r J ^ t For a time his father's brother, the, wise duke of 

Incidents of ^ _ ' ^ 

the War of Bedford, carried on the war in France with success 

and maintained good government in England. On 

his death in 1435, however, the English policy was unsuccessful 

in both directions: the French were steadily winning back their 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 399 

territory, and the government at home was disturbed by fac- 
tional quarrels of the great nobles. When Henry VI came of 
aere, therefore, the Lancastrian rule had already lost 

Decline of . *^ ' , . , , , . ^ , ,. 

theLancas- its popularity, and was the object of popular dis- 
tnan e. content and of factional opposition. The party in 
The French power in the court had advocated peace with France, 

Mamage. ^ , ^ ^ ' 

as a means of saving something of the English 
possessions there, and had negotiated the marriage of Henry 
VI with a French princess, Margaret of Anjou. This gave 
the factious nobles an opportunity to appeal to national 
feeling against the government, and to lay the blame of the 
French losses on the king and his French wife. Added to this 
was the discontent and restlessness in the country at large, due 
to the inefficient government and to heavy taxes. 

All these forces of opposition, the selfish clique of the great 
nobles, the outraged national feeling, and the demands for 
better government, naturally found a leader in the Yorkist 
Richard claimant to the throne. This was Richard, duke 

Duke of of York, representative, as we have seen, of an older 

York, Leader . ^ , , . . 

of theOppo- line than that of the Lancastrians. The situation 

was made worse by the intermittent madness of 
Henry VI, which began to afflict him after 1453. Parliament 
and the nobles insisted that Richard of York be made regent, 
the queen resisted because she feared his pretensions to the 

crown. The conflict went on in this form until 
York Claims 1460, when Richard of York formally asserted his 
1460^^°^^* right to the throne, and Parliament recognized him 

as regent for Henry VI and as heir to the throne 
Slain, 1461. on his death. Henry VI and Margaret had a son, 

Edward, prince of Wales, and the high-spirited queen 

ward Becomes refused to submit to his disinheritance. She took 

' ^"^ ^' up arms and defeated the Yorkists in a battle in 

^^^^^^^V' which Richard of York was slain and his younger 

son murdered in cold blood after the battle. The 
next year (146 1), however, the older son of Richard, Edward, 
who had become duke of York on his father's death, defeated 



400 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the Lancastrian forces, occupied London, secured from a 
hastily summoned ParUament the title of Edward IV, and 
then met and destroyed the main Lancastrian force. Soon 
after he got his hands on the unhappy Henry VI and held 
him prisoner in the Tower of London. Margaret of Anjou, 
with her young son, escaped to the continent and took refuge 
at the court of the French king, Louis XL 

The reign of Edward IV was interrupted by a new civil war, 
caused by the unsatisfied ambition of his chief supporter. 
Richard Neville, earl of Warwick, was the most powerful of the 
great nobles; the Neville connection could raise a 
Warwick, whole army of retainers, and it was largely by their 
m^er^"^^ help that the Yorkists had triumphed over the 
Lancastrian forces. Warwick naturally expected 
to have the leading place in the government of the young king, 
but Edward IV was determined to rule in his own person. Dis- 
appointed in his ambition, Warwick began to plot against the 
king; Edward IV turned on him and drove him and his sup- 
porters out of the kingdom. Warwick took refuge in France, 
where the wily Louis XI succeeded in bringing about an alli- 
w * k R ^^^^ between him and Margaret of Anjou, with the 
stores Henry object of restoring the Lancastrian line. In 1470 
Warwick returned to England, raised an army from 
his own retainers and from the Lancastrian party, and in turn 
drove Edward from England. Warwick then took the half- 
mad Henry VI from his imprisonment and restored him to the 
throne. 

The restored Lancastrian rule was very brief. Edward IV 
had found refuge with Louis XI 's bitter enemy, the duke of Bur- 
gundy; the next year (1471) he came back to England, de- 
feated Warwick in battle, in which the earl himself 
sllS^%7u was slain, and recovered the crown. In the battle 
of Tewksbury he defeated the forces which Mar- 
garet of Anjou was bringing to the support of Warwick, and 
after the battle the young prince of Wales, the hope of the Lan- 
castrian line, was slain in cold blood. The unhappy Henry VI 



THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR— SECOND PART 401 

was returned to his prison, and there shortly disappeared, 
murdered, it is supposed, by the agents of Edward IV. The 

rest of the reign of Edward IV was troubled only by 
Henry VI. ^^^ plotting of his brother George, duke of Clarence; 

Edward had him condemned by Parliament and 
secretly executed.* Edward IV died in 1483, leaving a young 
son to succeed him as Edward V. 

This youth never reigned. His uncle, Richard, duke of 
Gloucester, seized control of the government, put the young king 
and his still younger brother, the little duke of York, into the 

Tower, where they were murdered, and induced the 
Murdered, subservient Parliament to acknowledge him as King 
1483. Richard III. In spite, however, of his efforts to win 

Richard III, favor and popularity, the country turned against 

him. The direct Lancastrian line had been killed 
Firs?of the ^^ j ^ut the revolt found a leader in a member of a 
Tudor collateral branch, Henry Tudor, earl of Richmond, 

Monarcns. t j •> ? 

a descendant of John of Gaunt. In 1485 Richard 
III was defeated and slain in the last battle of the war of the 
Roses, the battle of Bosworth. The earl of Richmond became 
Henry VII, first of the Tudor line of monarchs. 

The outcome of thirty years of revolution, civil war, and 
assassination was the Tudor despotism. The extinction of 
families and the confiscation of lands had broken the power of 

the great nobles. Parliament had become the sub- 
Roses Leads servient tool of the faction in power. The coun- 
Despotism^"^ try, as represented by the substantial classes of 

the local landlords and the merchants of the cities, 
was heartily sick of violence and disorder and ready to accept 
a strong government. The Tudors were able to establish and 
maintain a strong personal rule without arousing any general 
protest. The older constitutional checks on the power of the 

* All of these crimes — the slaying of Edward, prince of Wales, after 
the battle of Tewksbury, the murder of Henry VI and of George, duke 
of Clarence — were attributed in later times to Richard III, but without 
good warrant. 



402 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

monarch, consisting of legal limitations in the charters and 
statutes, and of the active participation of Parliament in the 
government, fell into abeyance, and for more than a century 
the English government was virtually an absolutism. 



CHAPTER XXI 

THE DECLINE OF THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE 
PAPACY (1250-1500) 

At the beginning of the Middle Age it was the common be- 
lief that God had foreordained that the empire should never 
pass away, and that he had appointed the emperor to rule the 
world, giving him supreme authority over it. The 
pireand emperor, therefore, based his authority on "divine 

Omrch right." In opposition to this imperial theory the 

pope, Gregory VII, formulated the papal theory, 
by which he claimed supreme temporal authority over the whole 
world; in place of the empire, the church was to be eternal; 
in place of the emperor, the pope was by divine right the ruler 
of the world, having the power to make and depose emperors 
and kings. A few popes, such as Gregory VII, Alexander III, 
and Innocent III, were able to realize approximately their 
ideal of temporal supremacy. 

After the middle of the thirteenth century, however, the 
temporal power of the papacy declined. The pope was no 
longer the unchallenged arbiter, the " supernational " power of 
Europe. He ceased to dictate in the internal 
the^Papacy. affairs of the countries, and to exercise a dominat- 
ing influence in international matters. Both kings 
and peoples began to resent all papal interference in their 
political affairs. There were many indications that the pope 
was losing his hard-won position as temporal sovereign of the 
world. 

The chief cause of this decline in the temporal power of the 
pope is found in a corresponding increase in the power of secular 
rulers, (i) Feudalism broke down and the power passed into 
the hands of the king, who thereby became so much more pow- 
erful than his vassals that he was able to rule them and all his 

403 



404 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

people without the aid of the pope. (2) International relations 
became clearer, being dominated by political and commercial 
interests, which permitted no papal interference. 
Becorne^^^ (3) There had grown up a national pride, a national 
Strong, Do spirit, which united king and people and made them 
Pope's Aid. quick and strong to resist any attempt which a 
Cf. S. B., 175. foreigner might make to control them. Kings, no 
longer hampered by the rebellious resistance of 
their great vassals, found a strong support in their people. 
This newly developed sense of nationality served the kings as 
a basis for ambitious schemes and wars (for example, the wars 
which England waged with Ireland, with Scotland, and with 
France). 

The first clear evidence that a new order of things had be- 
gun was furnished by the contest which Philip IV (1285-13 14) 
of France had with the pope, Boniface VIII (i 294-1303), and 
Ph'li IV ^^^ successors. In France the particular question at 
Humbles the issue was the right of the king to tax the property 
of the clergy for the support of the general govern- 
ment. In theory all ecclesiastical persons and possessions were 
exempt from secular taxation, but the pope frequently per- 
mitted temporal rulers to levy a tax on them for the aid of 
the state in times of public necessity. With the consent of 
the pope such taxes had been assessed to carry on the crusades, 
to make war on Frederick II, to put down heresy, and for vari- 
ous other purposes. It frequently happened, however, that 
the large sums raised in this way for the crusades went into the 
king's treasury and were spent in other ways. Toward the 
end of the thirteenth century Philip IV of France made heavy 
assessments on the French clergy for secular purposes. Boni- 
face VIII, recognizing that the immunities and 
cos" 1296. " liberties of the church were thereby being destroyed, 
S B 162 issued the famous bull Clericis Latcos (1296), 
strictly forbidding laymen to tax the possessions 
of the church for any purpose whatsoever. Philip retaliated 
by forbidding money to be carried out of France, thus cutting 
off the pope's income from that country. 



DECLINE OF THE TEMPORAL POWER 405 

A bitter struggle involving the question of supremacy ensued. 
Boniface went so far as to summon the French clergy to a 
council at Rome for the purpose of dictating a settlement of all 
s B 164 ^^^ disorders in France. In reply to this Philip 
0., 67. first assembled his States General and assured him- 

self of the support of his people against the pope, 
and then sent an embassy to Rome with a refusal and a warn- 
ing. The pope was not disconcerted by this, but plied the am- 
bassadors with the most extravagant statements of his secular 
power. On the heels of this he published the noted bull Unam 
Sanctam (1302), which is the classic mediaeval expression of the 
papal claims to universal temporal sovereignty. In this bull 
Boniface declared that submission to the pope in temporal 
matters was necessary for salvation. Quite undaunted by this, 
Philip preferred a number of charges against Boniface and 
called for a general council to settle the quarrel. Boniface then 
published the ban against Philip and declared him deposed, 
but a month later (1303) Boniface was besieged in Anagni 
by the king's supporters and taken prisoner. He was person- 
ally maltreated, but a few days later set free. He died, how- 
ever, the next month, probably from chagrin and anger caused 
by the indignities which had been heaped upon him. The 
The Papacy victory of Philip was complete. Not only was Boni- 

at Avignon, f g^^e humbled ; his successors came so thoroughly 
1309-1377, ' ^ -' 

under French under the control of Philip that the papal seat was 

removed to Avignon, on the borderland of France, 
where for about seventy years (1309-13 7 7) the popes were under 
the influence of the French kings. As the duration of the papal 
residence at Avignon was about the same as that of the captivity 
of the Jews in Babylon, these seventy years are known in the 
history of the papacy as the "Babylonian captivity." 

In England also there were many indications that the opposi- 
EnglishOp- ^^^^ ^° papal domination was growing. In 135 1 
position to Parliament passed the "statute of provisors," for- 

Papacy. i • i t i • t_ 

bidding the pope to appoint any one to a bene- 
fice or living in England during the life of the holder of the 
benefice. In 1353 Parliament also passed the "statute of prae- 



4o6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

munire," forbidding Englishmen to carry their cases before a 
foreign judge. This was meant to put a stop to the custom of 
appealing cases to the pope. Further proofs of the increasing 
resistance of the English are found in the refusal of Parliament 
to pay tribute to the pope, and in the support which Wyclif's 
attacks on the papacy found among the people. 

In Germany also the pope met with a severe check. Here- 
tofore the popes had resorted to force, and their contests with 
the emperors had been settled by an appeal to arms. But the 
Opposition in ^o^g quarrel of the pope John XXII (1316-1335) 
Germany. ^j^-]^ |-}ig emperor Ludwig of Bavaria (13 14-1347) 
s. B., 157. was a battle of books. The interesting and signif- 
Marsilius of icant fact is that during this struggle a new theory 
Padua. q£ ^Yie sovereignty of the state and of its relation to 

Defensor the church was proposed. In a book called the 
Defensor Pacts ("Defender of Peace"), written 
' -'^5'^ • about 1324, Marsilius of Padua declared that the 
people are the state and hence may decide on the form of govern- 
ment which they wish; the church is subject to the state in all 
things; the bishop of Rome has no more authority than any 
other bishop; and the controlling power in the church is a 
general council composed of the whole body of Christians. The 
failure of Boniface VIII to defeat Philip IV of France showed 
that the papacy lacked the power to enforce its claims; the aim 
of Marsilius was to destroy the theory on which those claims 
were based. 

The residence of the popes at Avignon and their consequent 
subservience to the interests of the French king diminished the 
papal prestige. Throughout the Hundred Years' War the 
"French" English regarded the popes as the allies of France, 
Popes. and likewise the Germans during the struggle of 

R., 210. Ludwig of Bavaria with John XXII identified the 

papacy with France. As a matter of fact, the popes of the 
period were all Frenchmen, and French in their sympathies, 
and instead of impartially aiding all governments alike they 
seemed to be in the service of the French kings. Furthermore, 
at Avignon the papal income was not so great as it had been at 



DECLINE OF THE TEMPORAL POWER 407 

Rome, while the erection of- suitable buildings and the mainte- 
nance of the papal court necessitated the expenditure of greater 
p^p^l sums than ever before. All Christendom began to 

Taxation. grumble loudly at the heavy taxes of various kinds 
Cf. s. B., 163. which the popes now levied. This taxation called 
•,212, 13. £qj.^j^ ^^ severest criticisms of the papal court, 
which was charged with luxury and avarice. Protests and legis- 
lation were, however, all in vain, for the pope continued to 
levy larger sums on all Christian countries. 

The "Babylonian captivity" was followed by the great 
schism. In 1377 Gregory XI was induced to move his court 
back to Rome, where he died the next year. During the ab- 
sence of the popes Rome had decayed rapidly. The 
ScWsm^^^ cardinals, a majority of whom were French, were 
1388-1417. dissatisfied with the city and wished to return to 
s. B., 167. Avignon, where life had been far more comfortable. 
R.', 211. The new pope, Urban VI, refused to leave Rome 

and showed scant courtesy to the French cardinals, 
who finally seceded from him and elected a new pope, Clement 
VII, who returned to Avignon. The seceding cardinals al- 
leged that the election of Urban VI was invalid because the 
papal palace, in which they had met in conclave, had been sur- 
rounded by a Roman mob, some of whom had even forced 
their way into the conclave and threatened the cardinals with 
death, unless they should immediately elect a Roman or at 
least an Italian as pope; in terror for their lives and in order 
to quiet the mob they had hastily gone through the form of 
electing Urban VI, thinking that he would be honest enough to 
recognize the invalidity of his election. 

Whatever the facts in the case were, the result was deplorable. 
For the next twenty-nine years there were always two men (a 
part of the time even three) claiming to be pope, exercising the 
papal functions and prerogatives, and demanding 
obedience from all the Christian world. Each of 
the popes claimed the right to create cardinals and to confirm 
archbishops, bishops, and abbots, so that there were two col- 
leges of cardinals^ one in Rome, the other in Avignon, and for 



4o8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

most of the high positions in the church there were two 
claimants — two men contesting for the same bishopric or mon- 
astery. Each pope attempted to collect all the ecclesiastical 
dues, and each excommunicated and anathemiatized the other 
with all his followers and supporters. France naturally sup- 
ported Clement VII, and England, because of the Hundred 
Years' War, quite as naturally favored Urban VI. 

Such a state of affairs was unendurable, but there was no 

legal way of bringing it to an end. For some years the matter 

was discussed, but so long as the pope's headship of the church 

was held there was no way out of the difficulty. 

No Legal ■r^ i i • i 

Way of End- People began, however, to examme the grounds on 
Schism. which the papal claims were based, and this ex- 

„ amination led to a denial of the papal headship. 

It was asserted that the whole church was superior 
to the pope, and that therefore a general council of the church 
was qualified to act as a court, to call the two claimants before 
it, and to decide between them. There were many who re- 
fused to accept such a solution and doggedly stood by the papal 
theory that the pope was supreme and could be judged by 
no one. But, as the situation grew worse, and no other way 
seemed possible, the two colleges of cardinals finally agreed to 
Council of ^^^^ ^ general council. It met in Pisa in 1409, and 
Pisa, 1409. was largely attended. After solemnly declaring its 
s. B., 169, competency to try the two popes, it summoned 
^^°' them to appear before it for trial. Neither of the 

popes recognized its authority, and neither obeyed its summons. 
The council then deposed them and elected another, Alexander 
V (1409-1410). This action only increased the scandal and 
confusion and made the schism worse, for, as neither of the 
deposed popes yielded, there were now three popes. 
This situation led to the calling of another council, this 
., . time at Constance, in 1414. It was attended by 

Council of 7 -r -r j 

Constance, hundreds of persons from all parts of Europe and 
^^^^' was a truly international assemblage. Although 

called for the purpose of ending the schism, there were two other 
important matters to come before it. It was expected to deal 



DECLINE OF THE TEMPORAL POWER 409 

with the heresy of John Huss in Bohemia, and to reform the 
church "in its head and in its members." It soon disposed of 

the question of heresy by condemning Huss and 
R., 213, 214. handing him .over to the state to be burned (141 5). 
jj^^^^ The council was then divided over the programme to 

be pursued. The reform party demanded that the 
Reforms^. ° church should first be reformed, after which the 

pope should be elected. The opposing party in- 
sisted that the church should first have a head in order that he 
might direct the reforms.* The latter party won and the coun- 
cil determined to end the schism by electing a pope. This 
council was more cautious than the council at Pisa had been, 
and planned to clear the way for the new election by first as- 
suring itself of the removal of the three existing popes. Pope 
John XXIII, who had called the council, was frightened at its 
tone, and, fearing that he would be deposed, fled in disguise. 
Fortunately for the council, he was overtaken, brought back 
to Constance, and imprisoned. The leadership then passed 
definitely into the hands of the council. A long list of charges 
was made against John and he was tried and deposed. As he 
was a prisoner in the hands of the council, he was unable to offer 
any resistance to it and soon submitted. Negotiations were 

* The following Is a list of the popes and antipopes during the schism. 
The names of those who are recognized by the church as true popes are 
in italics. 

Roman Popes Antipopes at Avignon 

Gregory XI (1370-1378) returned 

to Rome, 1377. Clement VII (1378-1394). 

Urban VI (i 378-1 389). 

Boniface IX (1389-1404). Benedict XIII (1394-1417) de- 

posed in 141 7. 
Innocent VIII (1404-1406). 
Gregory XII (1406-1415) resigned 

in 1 41 5, but the church reckons 

his resignation from 1409. 

The Line of the Council of Pisa 

Alexander V (1409-1410). 

John XXIII (1410-1416). 

The Line of the Council of Constance 

Martin V (1417-1431)1 whose election ended the schism. 



4IO EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

begun with Gregory XII, the Roman pope, who was induced 
to resign. Benedict XIII, the pope at Avignon, however, stub- 
bornly refused to yield, and, as he still had a numerous following, 
especially in Spain, nothing could be done. Finally, 
in 141 7, the Spaniards were induced to desert his 
cause. The council then deposed him and ended the schism 
by electing Martin V (141 7-143 1). 

The council was then free to address itself to the question 
of reform. It was immediately apparent, however, that no 
thoroughgoing reforms would be made. There was no agree- 
^ , ment in the council as to whether the council or the 

Reforms. 

pope should conduct the reforms, nor was there 
agreement as to what reforms should be undertaken. 
The cardinals and bishops generally did not wish to be "re- 
formed," because nearly all the reforms proposed had for their 
aim the diminution of the income of the clergy. At length, 
after much discussion, the reform party had to content itself 
(i) with a decree that general councils should be held every 
ten years, and (2) with enumerating certain matters in which 
reforms were desirable. These matters were nearly all of a 
financial character, concerning chiefly the pope's power to dis- 
pose of ecclesiastical offices and benefices, his use of the income 
and property of the churches, the sale of indulgences, and, 
in general, the papal custom of getting all the money possible 
out of the churches. The list of reforms demanded shows 
conclusively that the wide-spread dissatisfaction with the church 
was due chiefly to the financial burdens which the clergy placed 
on the people. The whole matter of reform was left to the dis- 
cretion of the pope, and the council was dissolved without hav- 
ing done anything but end the schism. 

Martin V, after some hesitation, eventually called another 
Council of general council, to meet at Basel, in 143 1. The chief 

Basel, business to come before it was the question of the 

1431—1449. 

heresy in Bohemia, a matter which it finally settled 

'' ^' by making a very sensible compromise with the con- 
servative Bohemian party. The council then engaged in a quar- 
rel with the pope over the question of authority. It lost the 



DECLINE OF THE TEMPORAL POWER 411 

favor of Europe when it deposed him and renewed the schism 
by electing an antipope. Such ill-advised action was fatal to 
the prestige which it had gained by its promise of reforms. 
The pope cleverly made separate agreements with the chief 
governments, granting them certain advantages, and in this 
way he deprived the council of all support. It dragged its 
aimless and idle existence along until 1449, when it yielded 
to the pope and dissolved itself. This ended the period which 
is commonly called the "conciliar epoch," for thereafter peo- 
ple had very little confidence in the efficiency of a general 
Appeals to a council. Appeals for a new council were fruitless, 
Council because the popes always refused to call another. 

Forbidden. r- r j 

In 1459 Pius II forbade all appeals to a general 
■' ^^'^' council, and even condemned them as heretical. 
The idea, however, did not die out. Luther renewed the ap- 
peal, and the great council of Trent (1545-1563) was summoned 
as a last resort with the purpose originally of effecting a com- 
promise with the Lutherans and of putting an end to the schism 
begun by Luther. Protestantism, it may be said, accepted the 
conciliar theory, while the Roman Catholic church finally re- 
jected it, promulgating in 1870 the decree of papal infallibility, 
according to which the pope is the supreme authority in the 
church, in no way amenable to any power on earth. 

After its victory over the conciliar idea the papacy entered 
on a new period, during which it was animated by the spirit of 
the Renaissance. The popes were drawn into the political 

struggles of Italy and devoted themselves to the 
PopS.^^^^^ task of increasing their territory and power. In 

this they were so absorbed that they seemed to be 
temporal princes rather than the head of the church. They 
kept a standing army and were frequently engaged in war 
with their political enemies. They achieved undying fame by 
becoming munificent patrons of art and learning, and by gather- 
ing about them a host of artists and literary men. They spent 
incredible sums in the erection of buildings, and for manu- 
, scripts, pictures, statues, precious stones, and all kinds of works 
of art. Their court was brilliant and they lived in magnificent 



412 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

splendor. It became the custom for each pope to enrich the 
members of his family, conferring on them titles and providing 
them with incomes from the possessions of the church (ne- 
potism). To the loud demands for reform and retrenchment 
the popes replied by multiplying their expenditures. They 
put the world under contribution, by levying taxes of various 
kinds and under different names, so that gold flowed in streams 
^ _ ^ from all lands to Rome. For this, however, they 

o. a., i77j '^70. ... -. 

paid a ruinous price; they lost not only the affec- 
tion but even the confidence and respect of a large part of 
Europe. 

Nothing more clearly shows the ill-repute into which the 
papacy sank during this period than the biting epigrams and 
stories — whether true or not— ^which were circulated to the 
Eoi rams disparagement of the popes. Innocent VIII (1484- 
about the 1 493) was popularly charged with selling safe- 
conducts to robbers, and his treasurer ironically 
commended him for doing so by saying: "Your Holiness does 
well, for God willeth not the death of any sinner, but rather 
that all should pay and live." A Roman wit declared that it 
was quite proper to call this same Innocent VIII "father" 
(pope means father) because he had eight sons and as many 
daughters. A keen epigram was coined about Alexander VI: 
"Alexander sells the keys, the altars, and Christ; well, he has 
the right to sell them, because he bought them." It was 
reported of Leo X that after his election he said, "I mean to 
enjoy my pontificate," and that he later spoke of Christianity 
as a very lucrative fable. The popes derived a 
large income from the sale of offices and indulgences, 
and Sixtus IV was credited with saying: "A pope needs only 
pen and ink to get all the money he wants." 

Although we are grateful to the popes of that period for 
J.. . J.. their patronage of arts and learning, their artistic 
content with triumphs did not reconcile the people who had to 
apacy. ^^^ ^^^ them. On the contrary, the people every- 
where began to ask why they should furnish the money to 
support the pope, his family, and his court in luxury, and to 



DECLINE OF THE TEMPORAL POWER 413 

pay for his buildings and works of art. This discontent in- 
creased and produced bitter and revolutionary criticism of the 
Pg^ ^j church. The grounds for dissatisfaction were vari- 

Taxation. ous, yet the chief one was, without doubt, the papal 
s. B., 177, taxation. Almost all the complaints against the 
^'^ * church — and they were many — were essentially 

financial in character. Threatening voices were heard: ''The 
time is coming when your possessions will be seized and divided 
as if they were the possessions of an enemy." In Germany 
especially the burdens of papal taxation caused such deep and 
wide-spread dissatisfaction that the revolt of Luther was 
promptly popular and successful. 

We began our study of the Middle Age with an empire that 
claimed to be universal. No limits in time or space were set 
to the Roman empire. Its aim was to make the world one 
politically. It strove to destroy nations and nationality. 
But the task was too great for it. In the long struggle that 
ensued nationality won and the peoples of Europe grouped 
themselves together as nations and kingdoms. In the same 
way the church claimed to be universal. Its aim was to make 
the whole world one in rehgion. It strove to crush out all in- 
dependent thought and to confine the individual, in his think- 
ing, to prescribed limits. At the cost of much bloodshed and 
persecution the church was able during the Middle Age to sup- 
press heresy, as all independent thinking was called. But at 
the very threshold of the Modern Period the individual, in 
the person of Martin Luther, asserted his right to interpret 
the Bible for himself. The course of events in the Middle Age 
showed that a world empire, whether of bodies or souls, was 
impossible of realization. 



CHAPTER XXII 
GERMANY FROM 1250 TO 1500 

In the contest for supremacy between the empire and the 
papacy the empire, as we already know, was ruined. After 
the death of Frederick II (1250) it existed merely in name. 
The Empire The kings of Germany saw that the union of Ger- 
Ruined. many and Italy was impossible, and, for the most 

s. B., 147. part, wisely remained at home and permitted Italy 
to go its own way. Rudolf of Hapsburg (12 73-1 291), recogniz- 
ing that Italy had caused the ruin of his predecessors, com- 
pared it with a lion's cave, "all the tracks going in and none 
coming out." He made peace with the pope and with Charles 
of Anjou, king of Sicily, and acknowledged the papal claims, 
thus surrendering all for which the emperors for two hundred 
years had fought. A few of his successors did indeed attempt 
to renew the imperial claims in Italy, but their efforts were 
lamentably weak. 

Nevertheless the idea of a world-wide empire did live on, 
and men who were otherwise sane and sensible appealed to the 
magic of its name as if it were still the great power that it had 
The ''Idea" ^^^^ been. Thus, in 1338, Edward III of Eng- 
Still Existed, land sought the aid of the emperor Ludwig of 
S.B., 158, Bavaria (1313-1347). At the diet of Coblenz 
^^^' (1338) Ludwig was seated on a lofty throne with 

the princes of Germany and the king of England below him. 
Edward HI, who, you will remember, had just laid claim to 
the French crown, appealed to Ludwig against the king of 
France. Thereupon Ludwig pompously ''proclaimed to all the 
crimes, disobedience, and wickedness of the king of France. 
And after he had declared that the king of France had broken 
his oath to the emperor, he published a decree of forfeiture 
against him and his followers." He then adjudged the crown 

414 



GERMANY FROM 1250 TO 1500 415 

of France to Edward III of England. To us the whole per- 
formance seems a huge farce, for the emperors had long since 
ceased to exercise any authority over the nations of France 
and England, and even in Germany they had become mere 
figureheads, without authority or force. Ludwig himself was 
absurdly weak, cowardly, and ineffectual. Unable to chastise 
his unruly subjects, he could not control even his own duchy. 
The mere thought of his disposing of the French crown or of 
interfering effectually in the affairs of France was absurd. 
This action of Ludwig had of course not the slightest effect on 
the course of events. 

Although the idea of the empire still lived on, we may with- 
out loss omit further discussion of it and confine our attention 
entirely to the kingdom of Germany.* Instead of tracing the 
-^ . history of each king, however, it will be more 

Chief Inter- profitable to describe certain movements and events 
which were of lasting importance. These were (i) 
the dissolution of Germany into a few hundred little sovereign 
principalities and a corresponding decline of the royal power, 
(2) the rise and growth of the Hapsburg family through the 
acquisition of extensive lands, (3) the selfish power of the seven 
electors, (4) the expansion of Germany to the east, (5) the de- 
velopment of the cities and the formation of leagues among 
them, (6) the founding of the power of the Hohenzollern family, 
and (7) the beginning of Switzerland. 

During the last centuries of the Middle Age the political 
development in Germany was exactly the opposite of that in 
England and France. While the kings of those countries 
Ro al Power ^^^^ destroying the power of their great vassals 
Grows and building up a strong central government, the 

kings of Germany were losing more and more of 
their power, and their vassals were acquiring more and more 
sovereignty in their fiefs. That is, their fiefs were growing into 
sovereign principalities. This dissolution of Germany into a 
large number of small independent principalities was due in large 

* S. B., Nos. 231-233 and 245-250, throw many interesting sidelights 
on the life of this period. 



4i6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

measure to a mistaken policy of the German kings — a policy 
with which we are already familiar. To carry out their im- 
Cause perial plans in Italy they needed more aid from 

their German vassals than feudal custom permitted 
' them to demand. They were therefore reduced 
to the necessity of buying the military service of their vassals, 
who, taking advantage of the situation, demanded in return 
for their support of the imperial schemes a large increase in 
their power and independence. This price, although ruinous 
to the royal power, the kings of Germany felt constrained to 
pay. Time after time they bought the support of their 
vassals by surrendering to them some of their regalian 
rights. 

The rights most commonly demanded were the supreme 
judicial power, coinage, the establishment of markets, tolls, and 
the exemption from military service and from attendance upon 
the diet. Thus, in 1156, in order to obtain the support of his 
uncle, Henry "Ja-so-mir-Gott," and to smooth the way for 
his approaching expedition into Italy, Frederick I 
Austria, 1156. raised the mark of Austria to the rank of a duchy 
SB no ^^^ gave it to his uncle and his wife, declaring 
'^that (i) they and their children after them, 
whether sons or daughters, shall hold and possess it by hered- 
itary right. If our uncle and his wife should die without 
children, they may leave the duchy by will to whomsoever they 
desire. (2) We decree also that no person, great or small, 
shall presume to exercise any of the rights of justice within the 
duchy without the consent and permission of the duke. (3) 
The duke of Austria does not owe any service to the empire 
except to attend, when summoned, such diets as may be held 
in Bavaria. (4) He is not bound to join the emperor on any 
campaign except such as may be directed against parts of the 
empire neighboring to Austria." Such broad concessions left 
the king with little authority in the duchy of Austria. 

Unfortunately this policy of surrendering crown rights for 
support and aid strengthened the feudal tendencies which were 
just then powerful in Germany. Feudalism, a century and a 



GERMANY FROM 1250 TO 1500 417 

half slower in its development in Germany than elsewhere, was 
in fact just reaching the point of domination there. During 
the reign of Frederick I the feudahzation of the government of 

Germany was completed. From the days of Char- 
ment Feudal- lemagne to about 1 1 80 all the royal officials (dukes, 
^T^o ^^^^^ margraves, landgraves, palatine counts, and counts, 

the counts forming by far the most numerous class) 
ranked as princes of the realm and were by virtue of their 
office members of the diet. Frederick I, however, changed 
this about 11 80. From that time not the holding of an office 
but the holding of an important fief directly from the king 
made a man a member of the diet. Thereafter the diet was 
composed not of the king's officials but of his tenants-in-chief. 
In this way the lay princes of the realm were reduced from a 
few hundreds to sixteen (nine dukes, two palatine counts, 

three margraves, one landgrave, and one count), 
the Diet *^ The king, however, had the power to increase this 

number by creating new fiefs and conferring them 
upon whom he would. The ecclesiastical princes (archbishops, 
bishops, abbots, and abbesses) numbered more than sixty, and 
by virtue of their numbers had a preponderating influence in 
the diet. 

Frederick II was even more prodigal of the crown rights 
than his predecessors had been. In 1220, wishing to make his 
son king of Germany, he bought the support of the ecclesias- 
Frederickn ^^^^^ princes by granting them such extensive re- 
Gave away galian rights as to make them little kings, in fact 

Crown Rights. ?• .^ , . , ^ ' ., 

if not m name, and m 1232 he granted similar 
*' ^^ ~^^^' rights to the secular princes also. The time soon 
came when the princes could pillage the crown with impunity, 
for after the death of Frederick II (1250) there was a period, 
called the interregnum, during which there were 
n^^^^^^^®^' several kings, although none of them was every- 
where recognized. The death of Otto IV (1254) 
gave his rival, William of Holland, a clear field, and William 
was slowly winning recognition when he was killed by some 
Dutch peasants with whom he was at war. Rival kings were 



4i8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

then elected, Richard of Cornwall, brother of Henry III of 
England, and Alfonso of Castile. Neither of them really ex- 
ercised any authority in Germany. In fact, Richard spent very 
little time in Germany and Alfonso never even visited that coun- 
try at all. Taking advantage of the situation, the 

N'odIcs Seize 

Lands and nobles, both lay and clerical, seized all the crown 

SeCrown. lands they could, as well as the crown rights. 

. Consequently, when a king was finally elected 

Hapsburg (1273), he found that his new honor brought with 

to his family, it httle income. For three reasons the acquisition 

e T, of land in his own name and not in the name of the 

S. B., 150. 

crown became his chief interest, (i) He was com- 
pelled to defray the expenses of his government out of his pri- 
vate income; he would therefore wish to increase his income 
as much as possible. (2) Some of the princes of Germany had 
become possessed of so large a measure of sovereignty that the 
king had very little authority. So, if he wished to be more 
than a mere figurehead in German affairs, he must have enough 
force to impose his will on the princes. This he saw he could do 
only by making himself more powerful than they. (3) The 
German crown was elective. In order that his son might fol- 
low him in the kingship he must make his family so powerful 
that the electors could not refuse to choose his son. Accord- 
ingly we find that after 1273 all the kings of Ger- 
Kings toward many have the same policy: each one of them 
iUes^'^ ™ attempted to enrich his family by getting posses- 
sion of all the territory he could. Whenever it was 
possible he did this at the expense of the crown. That is, he 
gave the crown lands to his own family, thus impoverishing the 
crown still more. So long as his family held the crown, that 
would make little difference, but a king chosen from another 
family would find the crown's resources diminished. To justify 
himself in this policy he could say that the crown was already 
hopelessly weak, and that a strong family would eventually 
make the crown strong. 

The most conspicuous example of this policy is furnished 
by the house of Hapsburg. When Rudolf, count of Hapsburg, 



Note to Map XVIII. — The heavy black line is the boundary of the Holy 
Roman Empire, which still existed theoretically, although it had ceased 
to have meaning as a political organization. Already by the end of the 
fifteenth century the outlying parts were drifting away from it. The Nether- 
lands with Luxemburg had come into the possession of the French dukes 
of Burgundy (later into the hands of the Hapsburgs), and formed virtually 
a distinct territory. Lorraine and Franche Comte (largely French in popu- 
lation) were being drawn into the circle of French political influence. The 
Swiss Confederation was virtually a separate state. The parts of northern 
Italy which were reckoned as belonging to the empire (Milan, Florence, 
etc.) were in fact independent states. On the east, Bohemia was to come 
under the control of the Austrian Hapsburgs and form part of the Austria- 
Hungary of later times. Thus the empire was being reduced to the terri- 
tory corresponding to modem Germany; even within the German part there 
was no real political unity, but each prince and each free city was virtually 
independent of control from the nominal head, the emperor. 

The splitting up of Germany into virtually independent states had gone 
so far by 1500 that it would be impossible in a small map to show all the 
divisions (Shepard, Atlas, pp. 86, 87, gives a good impression of this condi- 
tion). Note the seven electoral principalities (imderlined) : namely, the three 
archbishoprics of Mainz, Trier, and Cologne; and the four secular states, the 
kingdom of Bohemia, the Palatinate of the Rhine, the electorate of Saxony, 
and the mark of Brandenburg. Other principalities of considerable size 
were: the duchy of Bavaria, the duchy of Saxony, the duchy of Brunswick, 
the county of Nassau, etc. There were a great many other counties and 
lordships of smaller extent, and in addition the ecclesiastical lords, arch- 
bishops, bishops, and abbots ruled as princes over the fiefs attached to their 
office. Note the large number of free or imperial cities, which were virtually 
self-governing city republics: Basel, Strassburg, Worms, Frankfort, Cologne, 
Bremen, Hamburg, Liibeck, Augsburg, Nuremberg, etc. 



GERMANY FROM 1250 TO 1500 419 

was made king of Germany (i 273-1 291) his family,* although 
not obscure, was by no means powerful. He was confronted 
Growth of the ^^^^ ^ difficult task. Many parts of Germany 
Hapsburgs. were infested with robber barons, the roads were 
s. B., 146, insecure, the coinage was debased, and the crown 
^"^ ' ^^^" lands and rights had been appropriated by the 
nobles. To recover these he made strenuous efforts. Al- 
though the princes, in solemn diet, awarded them to him and 
told him it was his right and duty to recover them, they stub- 
bornly refused to surrender those which they themselves had 
seized. Nevertheless, by cleverness and a series of lucky 
events he acquired possession of some of the largest principali- 
ties in Germany. Among these were the duchies 
of Austria, Styria, Carinthia, and Tyrol, and the 
kingdoms of Bohemia, Poland, and Hungary. Although not all 
of these remained in continuous possession of the Hapsburgs, 
the family nevertheless became so powerful that it practically 
acquired hereditary possession of the German crown, for after 
1438 it furnished all the German kings except two. 

Although the Hapsburg family became rich and powerful, 
it could not make the crown strong. It was not able to arrest 
the process of disintegration which the German kings, especially 
Frederick Barbarossa and Frederick II had done so 
memb^red. ^^ niuch to advance. The nobles continued to in- 
crease their sovereign powers until German unity 
was destroyed. After 1256 Germany disintegrated rapidly, and 

* His ancestors had been active in acquiring land, and their possessions 
were scattered over northern Switzerland and southern Germany. 
Rudolf was so notorious a "grabber" that it was a common saying that 
if God should vacate his throne for a few minutes Rudolf would carry 
if off. And the bishop of Basel, on hearing of the election of Rudolf, 
exclaimed: "Sit tight on your throne, O Lord, or Rudolf will crowd 
you off." The result of this land-grabbing policy, which has charac- 
terized the Hapsburgs ever since, Is to be seen In the motley make-up 
of the realm of the Hapsburgs, the empire of Austria-Hungary, which 
was composed of about a dozen different nationalities that have been 
subjected during the last six hundred years. And It was this same 
land-grabbing policy of the Hapsburgs — the seizure of little states In 
the Balkans, Bosnia, and Herzegovina In 1908, and the determination 
to seize Servia — ^that led directly to the Great War in 19 14. 



420 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

at the close of the Middle Age {i. e., 1500) it consisted of about 

350 little states, each enjoying a large measure of sovereignty. 

In 1356 Charles IV published the golden bull, 

Golden Bull, . i • i i ,. , ^ . r • • • 

1356. in wnicn he attempted to nx as in a constitution 

g g ^^ the rights and status of the princes. He saw that 
Germany was no longer a monarchy but a federa- 
tion of sovereign states. This document shows in the clearest 
manner possible that sovereignty had passed from the crown to 
the princes. It deals chiefly not with the important elements 
of a government, but with matters of etiquette. It confirms 
the sovereign rights of the princes, but passes in silence over 
the rights of the crown, which were, in fact, almost neg- 
ligible. 

Although all the princes of Germany were virtually sovereign 
in their lands, there were seven of them who quite overtopped 
all the others. These were the archbishops of Mainz, Cologne, 
The Seven ^^^ Trevcs, the king of Bohemia, the margrave 
Electors. of Brandenburg, the duke of Saxony, and the 
S. B., 153-156. count palatine on the Rhine. They owed their 
■' ^'^^* high distinction to the fact that, about the middle of 
the thirteenth century, in some way — no one knows exactly 
how — they had acquired the sole right of voting for the king. 
Hence they were called the seven electors. They took ad- 
vantage of their position to sell their votes outright and to 
squeeze out of the candidate all the advantages they could. 
No elector would cast his vote until he had reached an agree- 
ment with the candidate as to the price to be paid for it. Some 
of these agreements have been preserved for us and show the 
shameless manner in which all the electors, ecclesiastical as 
well as lay, trafficked in their votes. They also secured for 
themselves a controlling voice in the management of affairs by 
binding the king not to take any important action without 
first obtaining their consent, for which, of course, they always 
demanded some kind of pay. It was due largely to this selfish 
policy of the electors that the crown remained weak and unable 
to build up a strong royal power. 

If we should look only at the political history of Germany 



GERMANY FROM 1250 TO 1500 421 

during the period from 1250 to 1500 we should find it trivial 

and dull. AH, from the king down, were absorbed in a narrow, 

selfish policy, to the complete ruin of the central 

Expansion of t, i . , . , . 

Germany to power. But there were certain thmgs bemg ac- 
^ ^^^' complished in a quiet way which were to be of 
S. B., 298. lasting benefit to Germany. The first of these was 
the expansion of Germany to the east. Since the 
days of Charlemagne the German frontier had been steadily 
advanced to the east at the cost of the independence of many 
Slavic tribes, who occupied all of what is now Germany east of 
the Elbe. The princes who held lands along the frontier endeav- 
ored to conquer and germanize the neighboring Slavs, and the 
church eagerly devoted itself to the task of Christianizing them. 
Merchants, colonists, and monks did their share of the work. 
The German order, having failed to obtain a permanent place 
in Palestine, saved itself for a while from degenerating and 
from the fate of the Templars by establishing itself among the 
Slavs on the east Baltic. The order became a little state, ex- 
tended its boundaries by conquest, and ruled over the con- 
quered peoples with an iron hand. Weakened, however, by 
a long and unsuccessful conflict with Poland, it came to an end 
in the sixteenth century, and the margrave of Brandenburg (a 
member of the HohenzoUern family) inherited its lands. 

The political disunion in Germany had at least one com- 
pensation, for it fostered the development of a large number of 
cities. These cities were governed by their lord (archbishop, 
bishop, abbot, duke, count), but from the twelfth 
Cities. century many of them succeeded in freeing them- 

S B ^01- 2K ^^^^^^ from this arbitrary rule and acquired the right 
R., n8, 119. to govern themselves. All cities which governed 
The Form of themselves were called "free cities." In all of them 
Government. ^^^ government was much the same in form, con- 
sisting of a mayor, or burgomaster, and a board of 
aldermen. In Germany, as elsewhere in Europe, the towns rep- 
resent the new and modern element, which was rapidly chang- 
ing feudal society and institutions. Before the growing power 
of the cities feudahsm was disappearing, but not without a hard 



422 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

struggle. The lords resented the increasing wealth and inde- 
pendence of the towns and often made war on them. Although 
the nobles won all the battles in the open field, they could not 
take the cities. The increasing wealth of the citizens gave them 
an advantage over the nobility, and their power grew while 
that of the nobles declined. Of course these German cities 
did not claim to be independent states as the cities in Italy did. 
They recognized that they were a part of Germany and that 
they were under a lord, but they were intent on reducing the 
extent of their obligations to him as much as possible. From 

the fact that some of the cities had the emperor for 
cTdes?^ their lord they were called "imperial cities," while 

s B ^lo ^11 t^^s^ which had another lord (duke, bishop, etc.) 

were called '^provincial cities." Imperial cities en- 
joyed the distinction of being invited to send representatives 
to the diet to assist in its deliberations. 

As the cities were engaged chiefly in industry and commerce 
it was of the greatest importance to them that the land should 
have peace. The weakness of the central government and the 

spirit of violence which animated the nobility, many 

Rhine League, Qf whom were "robber barons," forced the cities to 
1254. ' 

take measures to protect themselves. The Rhme 

0-, 59^^ '^^^ league was formed (1254) to clear the Rhine of rob- 
The Hanseatic ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ make it safe for the merchants with their 
League, 1241. goods to pass from one city to another. The Han- 
S. B., 320-325. seatic league was formed by the cities around the 
Baltic for a similar purpose. It had its origin in a 
local agreement between Lubeck and Hamburg for the mutual 
protection of their merchants (1241). Fortunately for these 
cities, there were no great princes in northern Germany to 
hamper their growth and development. The league served its 
purpose so well that all the towns of the north were soon glad 
to become members of it. Under its protection an extensive 
commerce was developed, from which the cities grew rich. Al- 
though at first the league's only object was the protection of 
commerce, it soon became necessary for it to interfere in po- 
litical matters. It was strong enough to carry on a success- 




o 


3 


b 


■4-> 


o 


rt 


rt 


■!-> 


rJLi 




t-l 


•—l 


O 






^ 


■«-> 




3 


en 




N 


TJ 



C 


^ 


G 


y 


i» 


oi 


-fc-> 


d 






<u 




CO 


N 




3 






H-1 


is 
CO 




C 


c 




)-i 


M 


c« 


OJ 


<u 


tu 


pq 


-o 


U) 


o 




o 


s 


C/J 


tn 




>. 


C 


o 












•(-> 




S 





en u 

d > 

.5 <4=1 

I ^ 

'^ _. 



rt 3 
o ^ 



O 

u 



"o 

•I— V 

tn 
en c3 

^ en 

<D +-> 

■^ IT) 

<*- CO 
O M 
«-! -(-> 

"^ 3 
^ C> 

o -^ 

j-i " 
i^ .- 

Cj rO 
en '^ 

o •-• 

en (jj 

en 2 

IS "rf 

H ^ 






aj 'Jn 



° i. 

U en 

OJ '^ 

:: Td 

CJ i-d 

i-i en 

■4-> Zj:^ 

C <!-> 

• M en 

- « 

8 a 



3 
N 



GERMANY FROM 1250 TO 1500 423 

ful war with Denmark, and for some years it was the undis- 
disputed master of the whole north. In the fifteenth century 
the league began to decline in power. The Baltic cities had 
been fortunate in being near the rich herring fisheries along the 
coast of Sweden. But in the first half of the fifteenth century 
the herring ceased to enter the Baltic and were to be found 
in large numbers only along the coast of Holland. The com- 
mercial importance of the league declined still further when 
new and more important trade routes were discovered and 
developed. The cities gradually lost also their political inde- 
pendence and importance, and in the course of time were ab- 
sorbed by the governments of the countries in which they 
were situated. 

We have yet to record a fact, which, without particular im- 
portance at the time, was destined later to lead to the po- 
litical regeneration and unification of Germany. The mark 
of Brandenburg, being flat, sandy, and marshy, 
zolferns Ac- ^^^ ^^^ ^ valuable possession. Its chief attraction 
quire Bran- -yyas the political influence which it conferred on its 

denburg, 141 1. ^ 

possessor, who thereby became one of the seven 
1 60b.' ^ °^' electors. When the electoral family died out, in 
141 1, the mark was granted to Frederick of Hohen- 
zollern, burgrave of Nuremberg, who now became an elector. 
He and his successors built up a political power in the mark 
which, in the nineteenth century, became the ruling power 
(Prussia) in Germany. 

In the southern part of the empire we find the beginnings of 
another movement which was to lead to the establishment of a 
separate and independent state, subsequently known as Switzer- 
ry . . , land. The troubles and violence of the times led 

Beginning of 

Switzerland, the Communities of the three forest cantons (coun- 
The Forest ties) Schwyz, Uri, and Unterwalden, to renew and 
Cantons. enlarge a former agreement to aid one another 
s. B., 152, against all enemies and lawbreakers. The special 
point for which they contended was that they be- 
longed directly to the crown and had no lord but the emperor. 
In the course of time they were joined by other cantons and 



424 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

their power began to be felt. They had to contend against two 
famiHes which tried to get possession of them. The Hapsburgs 
tried it first, but in three famous battles the Swiss peasants 
were more than a match for the best armies that the duke could 
bring into the field. Then their hard-earned independence was 
threatened by Charles the Bold of Burgundy, but, with the 
aid of their allies, they cut his army to pieces (1477, battle 
of Nancy) and Charles himself was slain. They remained 
nominally a part of the empire to the peace of Westphalia 
(1648), when their neutral independence was recognized. 



CHAPTER XXIII 
THE REMAINING COUNTRIES OF EUROPE 

We have given a somewhat detailed account of England, 
France, and Germany, because during the Middle Age they were 
the leading powers of Europe. For the sake of completeness 
there is added here a brief account of the minor countries also. 

I. Bohemia. — Since the days of Charlemagne the German 
kings had regarded Bohemia as a part of their kingdom. In 
1204 Philip of Suabia honored its duke by conferring on him 
The Ha s- ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ king, a title which Innocent III af ter- 
burgsAcqviire ward Confirmed. When this royal family became 

Bohemia. . , . . ' , 

extmct there was a long struggle over the possession 
of the crown, but the Hapsburg family finally got it, and Bo- 
hemia remained a part of the Hapsburg's empire until its dis- 
solution in 191 9. 

On Bohemia, at the beginning of the fifteenth century, the 
eyes of all Europe were fixed because of the appearance there 
of the teachings of Wyclif under a slightly different form. 
^ , „ As the wife of Richard II was a Bohemian princess, 

John Huss. ^ 

there was a good deal of intercourse between Eng- 
land and Bohemia. Among others, Bohemian students found 
their way to Oxford, imbibed the doctrines of Wyclif, and car- 
ried his writings back to Bohemia. Some of these writings fell 
into the hands of John Huss. After studying them he adopted 
their doctrines and began to teach them to his students in the 
university of Prague. He was soon charged with heresy, and 
the university, the city, and even the whole country were di- 
vided into two hostile camps, the one in support of him, the 
other against him. The Germans, of whom there were many in 
Bohemia, generally opposed him, while the Bohemians, who, in 
the flush of a growing national pride, had come to hate the Ger- 
mans as foreigners, regarded Huss as a national hero and sup- 

425 



426 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ported him with all the intensity of ardor born of race hatred. 
Under the influence of Germans, the Bohemians, like all the 
other Slavs lying along the eastern frontier of Germany, had 
been losing their nationality and becoming Germanized, but all 
Bohemia was now aroused in a vigorous reaction against this 
German influence, and supported Huss. The bitterness in- 
creased until Germans were no longer safe in Prague, and con- 
sequently both professors and students withdrew from Bohemia 
into Germany, where they gave a new impetus to learning. 

The great council of Constance (1414-1417) then took the 
matter in hand. It summoned Huss into its presence, tried 
him, convicted him of heresy, and had him burned. His death 

caused an uprising in Bohemia. After he had been 
Heretic, ?4is. Condemned as a heretic, many of the Bohemians, 

unwilling to support his cause further, remained 
faithful to the church. But others clung fanatically to his 
^. ., „, doctrines and took up arms to defend them. Civil 

Civil War. '■ 

war followed between these two parties, and Sigis- 
mund, the German king, who had inherited the crown of 
Bohemia, made several unsuccessful attempts to pacify the 
country. Finally the Hussites quarrelled among themselves, 
separated into two parties, and made war on each other. The 
more conservative of them were victorious in battle and 
then became reconciled to the church. The extremists, after 
being utterly defeated in battle, changed in character com- 
pletely. They lost all their fanatical violence and preached and 
practised non-resistance to the state. Bitter persecutions 
failed to destroy them, and they spread through Moravia and 
Poland. Finally they were exiled from Bohemia. They set- 
tled in Saxony, where they established schools which became 

famous. The Moravian, or Bohemian Brethren in 

Moravian or ' 

United America (there is a large settlement of them at 

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania) are some of the remains 
of this sect, whose romantic history and educational activities 
we cannot follow here in their interesting details. 

2. Poland. — Besides Bohemia there were, east of Germany, 
several other Slavic states, chief of which were Poland and 



THE REMAINING COUNTRIES OF EUROPE 427 

Lithuania. The archbishop of Magdeburg regarded it as his 
special duty to Christianize and Germanize all these Slavs. In 

the year 1000 an effective check was given to the 

German influence among them by the establish- 
ment of a Polish archbishop at Gnesen; and, as we have already 
seen, this independent ecclesiastical organization was a means 
of preserving their nationality. In the eleventh century Poland 
was small, consisting chiefly of the territory lying in the valley 
of the river Wartha. In the next century, by conquering and 
annexing Pomerania, Poland acquired a seaboard. Then, by 
the marriage of a Polish princess to Prince Jagello of Lithuania, 
the two countries were united. Poland made a successful war 
on the German order and took a large part of its land. At the 
close of the Middle Age Poland occupied a large belt of terri- 
tory east of the Germans, extending from the Baltic to the 
Black Sea, and gave promise of becoming one of the powerful 
states of Europe. But its situation exposed it to the attacks 
of its powerful and covetous neighbors, Russia on the east, and 
Prussia and Austria on the west; and the dissensions among its 
nobility and the lack of a native royal family were to cause its ruin 
and, in the eighteenth century, to lead to its dismemberment. 
3. Russia. — ^The early history of Russia is somewhat 
legendary, but it is probable that the Norsemen made some 
settlements among the Slavs east of the Baltic, and one of the 

Norse leaders, Rurik, is credited with having united 

all the tribes of Slavs about Novgorod under his 
iwelk^^^ rule (862). Other tribes were conquered, and the 

young kingdom expanded to the south and soon 
included Kiev on the Dnieper. Norse settlements were scat- 
tered along the rivers to the Black Sea, and through them the 
country was brought into connection with Constantinople 

rather than with Rome. In the tenth century Rus- 
Greek Church, sia adopted the Greek form of Christianity, to which 
The Mongols ^^ ^^^^^ adheres. In the thirteenth century Russia, 

which had broken up into several little principali- 
ties, was overwhelmed by the Mongols, and for about two 
hundred years was subject to the great khan, paying him 



428 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

tribute. Toward the end of the fifteenth century the prince 
of Moscow, feeling strong enough to rebel, killed the khan's 
representatives who came to demand the annual tribute, and 
made himself independent of the Mongol rule. He and his 
successors, however, remained oriental in customs, manners, 
and dress, and Russia had no relations with the rest of Europe 
until Peter the Great (1689-1725) made it a European power, 
and brought his people into contact with European culture. 

4. Hungary. — ^The Magyars, or Hungarians, when defeated 
by Otto I in 955, settled in the territory which they still occupy. 
Christianity was soon afterward introduced among them, and 

in the year 1000 Hungary became a Christian king- 
^^ungary, ^^^ ^^^ papal fief, their ruler receiving from the 

pope the title of king. The direct line of their na- 
tive royal family died out in 1301, and the crown passed to a 
collateral line. There ensued, however, a long contest over the 
crown, in which the Hapsburg family was finally successful. 
Hungary was a part of the Hapsburgs' possessions until 1919. 
In the fifteenth century the Turks invaded the country and 
completed its conquest in 1526, destroying the Hungarian army 
in the battle of Mohacs. The history of the heroic struggle 
of the people against the Turks and their final victory over 
them belongs to the modern period. 

5. The Greek Empire and the Turks. — During a part of 
the Middle Age the Greek empire, through Constantinople, 
dominated the eastern Mediterranean commercially and grew 

rich through this supremacy. Constantinople, how- 
Ernpire^^ ever, encountered strong competition from the 

Italian cities, and the fourth crusade broke its 
power for more than fifty years. The Mohammedans pressed 
on the empire from the east and the emperors were generally so 
occupied with the struggle for existence against them and the 

barbarians north of the Danube that they were never 
Tur£^°^^" able to take any important part in the affairs of the 

west. About the middle of the fourteenth century 
the Osman Turks came from central Asia and began a bril- 
liant period of conquest which made them masters of western 



THE REMAINING COUNTRIES OF EUROPE 429 

Asia. They then attacked the Greek empire and encroached 
steadily on its territory. They invaded the Balkan peninsula 
and extended their sway far north of the Danube. The Greeks 
made a long but ineffectual resistance to their progress. Con- 
Fall of Con- stantinople held out for some time after all the 
stantinople, territory of the empire had been taken, but with its 
fall, in 1453, the Greek empire came to an end, and a 
Mohammedan state was established in Europe with its capital 
at Constantinople. The Turks pushed far up into central 
Europe and conquered Hungary (1526). They did not cease 
to be a danger to Christian Europe until the end of the seven- 
teenth century. The story of their successes, of their siege of 
Vienna where their power was finally broken, of their gradual 
withdrawal, and of the heroic rebellion of various Christian 
provinces (Greece, Bulgaria, Roumania, Servia, and others) 
belongs to the history of the modern period. 

6. Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. — The Germanic peo- 
ples (commonly called Northmen) who inhabited Denmark, 
Norway, and Sweden were divided into many independent 
tribes, much as the Germans were in the days 

Scandinavia. . . •1.1 1 • 

of Tacitus. During the ninth and tenth centuries 
a process of consolidation took place, the little tribes of 
each country being united to form a kingdom. For nearly 
four centuries, while these countries were slowly emerging from 
barbarism, their history is a confused succession of international 
wars and civil strife caused chiefly by the ambitions of their 
rulers. In 1397 both their international and civil wars were 

brought to an end by the union of Calmar, an agree- 
Calmar° 1397. nicnt by which the three countries were united under 

one ruler, Queen Margaret. In theory the three 
countries were equal, but, as a matter of fact, Denmark, being 
the strongest, was the leading power and dominated the other 
two. The Swedes resented this and after several attempts to 
revolt finally succeeded in gaining their independence (1523, 
Gustavus Vasa). 

During the ninth and tenth centuries it seems that many of 
the tribal chiefs were unwilling to yield to the movement of 



430 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

unification and so took to the sea and lived by plundering the 
countries which lay along it. Eventually they settled in the 

countries which they had first visited as marauders, 
of NoShmen. They settled in the islands north of . Scotland, 

in Iceland, and Greenland, and even visited the 
coast of North America. Their conquest and settlement of 
England in the ninth and tenth centuries have already been 
mentioned. They planted colonies also in Ireland and in 
Russia. The most important of all their settlements was in the 
, „ valley of the Seine (on), which came to be called 

"Normandy.' ^_ ^^^^ ■ r ^ 

Normandy. Their fundamental character was not 
changed by emigration, for these Normans were one of the 
most ambitious and restless peoples of Europe. Their duke, 
WiUiam, in 1066 conquered England and became its king. In 
the eleventh century Norman nobles went as adventurers to 
southern Italy, where they succeeded in building up a kingdom 
(Sicily). From there they more than once tried to conquer 
the Greek empire, and Bohemond, the greatest of the leaders 
of the first crusade, was a Norman. 

7. Spain. — Spain was occupied by Mohammedans early in 
the eighth century (711), but some of the population withdrew 
before the invaders into the southern slopes of the Pyrenees, 
where they were able to hold out against all Mo- 
hammedan attacks. Charlemagne went to their 
aid and organized the territory as far south as the Ebro into the 
Spanish march. This march gradually broke up 
Kingdoms. ^^•^ little kingdoms were forrtied in the north, such 
as Catalonia, Aragon, Navarre, Castile, and Leon. 
These kingdoms kept up an incessant struggle against the 
Mohammedans and were increasingly successful. The Mo- 
hammedan power grew weaker, and the result was the dissolu- 
tion of the caliphate of Cordova and the establishment of several 
small Mohammedan states (Toledo, Seville, Cordova, Saragossa, 
and others). By 1300 these Mohammedan states had all been 
conquered and absorbed by the Christian kingdoms, and only 
the little principality of Granada was left in the hands of Mo- 



THE REMAINING COUNTRIES OF EUROPE 431 

hammedans. Then these Christian kingdoms were gradually 
united. Castile and Aragon, the leading states, having ab- 
Spain sorbed all the others, were themselves united in 

United, 1474. j^y^ by the marriage of Isabella, queen of Castile, 
Granada, to Ferdinand, king of Aragon. They completed 
^^^^' the unification of Spain by expelling the Moors 

from Granada (1492), and under their vigorous rule Spain be- 
came one of the leading powers of Europe. 

8. Portugal. — Geographically and racially Portugal be- 
longs to Spain, but, by a curious freak of fortune, escaped 
being absorbed by Castile, as the other neighboring kingdoms 
Portugal. were. In 1095 the county of Portugal consisted 

only of a small territory on the Douro River. In 
1095. 

that year Alfonso, king of Castile, invested his 
^^^^" son-in-law, Henry of Burgundy, with it. In conse- 

quence of a famous victory over the Moors, in 1139, its count 
was made a king. Fortune favored his family, and successive 
kings not only maintained their independence against the 
growing power of Castile, but within one hundred years they 
had, by a series of successful campaigns against the Moham- 
medans, increased their kingdom to its present size. 

9. The Leading Powers of Italy. — The city-states of Italy, 
which had for some time been governing themselves, eventually 
fell into the hands of usurpers, so that this period of Italian his- 
tory may be called the age of the despots. No at- 
tempt will be made to give a history of all the little 

states into which Italy had been broken up, but a word may be 
said about the five most important of them. These are the 
kingdoms of Sicily and of Naples, and the republics of Florence, 
Venice, and Genoa. The papal state was not less important 
than these, but an account of it is given elsewhere. In 1266 
Sicily. the pope gave the kingdom of Sicily (which, it will 

Pedro II of ^^ remembered, included both Sicily and southern 
Aragon. ' Italy) to Charles of Anjou, the brother of the king 
of France. In 1282, however, Sicily rebelled, drove Charles 
out, and conferred the crown on Pedro II, king of Aragon. 



432 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Pedro's wife was the daughter of Manfred, and consequently 
the Sicilians regarded him as the heir of the Hohenstaufen 
claims. Sicily remained in the possession of the royal family 
of Aragon during the rest of the Middle Age. The crown 
of Naples passed from one branch of the Ange- 
the^A^ngevins. ^^^ family to another, and for a while (during the 
middle of the fifteenth century) it was reunited to 
the kingdom of Sicily. Eventually the Angevin claim passed 
to Charles VIII of France, who in 1494 was persuaded to in- 
vade Italy with the hope of acquiring the crown of Naples. 
The kingdoms of both Sicily and Naples suffered much from the 
incompetence and violence of their rulers, and neither of them 
shared to any extent in the Renaissance which made the same 
period so glorious in all the rest of Italy. 

In Florence, after about three centuries of democratic rule, 
the Medici family got possession of the government and ruled 
the city in an autocratic way. In this respect the history of 
Florence is typical of that of all the Italian cities 
(except Venice), in every one of which the demo- 
by^''^Despcfts " ^^^^^^ form of government was overthrown and re- 
placed by an autocratic one. In each case it was 
some local family that made itself master of the city. In 
Milan first the Visconti family (131 2) and then the Sforza family 
(1450) obtained the government. A quarrel arose between two 
members of the latter family, and one of them, hoping to improve 
his position, urged Charles VIII of France to come to Italy to 
make good his claim to the throne of Naples. 

When the Greek empire was divided among the crusaders 
Venice Ac- (1204) Venice received as its share of the spoils 
quires Land nearly all the Greek islands, besides some ports on 

in the East. -^ . . 

the mainland. Through these possessions its power 

War between 

Venice and was SO increased that for some time it dominated the 
Genoa. Mediterranean commercially. A bitter and sense- 

less commercial rivalry arose between Venice and Genoa which 
involved them in a war for more than a hundred years. In 
the battle of Chioggia (1381) Venice broke Genoa's power 



THE REMAINING COUNTRIES OF EUROPE 433 

by destroying its fleet. Genoa then lost its importance as well 
as its independence and became subject in turn to Milan and to 

France. Venice did not long enjoy the fruits of its 
138°^^^' victory over Genoa. While the two cities were 

wearing each other out in this ill-advised and suicidal 
war, a new enemy, the Turk, was slowly extending his power to 
the west, conquering foot by foot the Greek empire, and one by 
one depriving Venice of its islands. The two cities, blinded by 
their ill-timed jealousy, were so intent on destroying each 
other that they paid no attention to the successes of the Turks. 
There was enough commerce to make both cities rich, and 
they should have joined their forces to resist the common 

enemy. It was due in large measure to this blind 
Advance. ^ ^^^ Stupid jealousy between Venice and Genoa that 

the Turks were able to conquer so much of Europe. 
Venice saw its mistake when it was too late. Down to about 
1400 the city had played no part in Italian affairs, but when it 
discovered that it was losing all its lands in the east to the 
Turks, it turned its face to the west and began to make con- 
quests on the Italian mainland. During the fifteenth century 
it was one of the "great powers" in Italy. 

10. The Mongols. — While pope and emperor were engaged 
in their uncompromising struggle for supremacy, the Mongols 
threatened to deluge Europe with heathenism. This strange, 

half -barbarous people, whose home was in the 

Mongols. . i X ' 

neighborhood of Lake Baikal, became a great 
power dm-ing the latter half of the twelfth century. The 
founder of their power, Temujin, better known as Genghis 
Khan (the great khan, 1155-1227), overran and subjected an 
immense territory which extended from the Pacific to central 
Europe, and included Corea, northern China, central and 
western Asia, southern Russia, and the valley of the lower 
Danube. At his death, in 1227, his great empire was di\dded 
among his sons, who continued his aggressive policy. Southern 
Russia, Poland, Hungary, Croatia, Dalmatia, Servia, and 
Bulgaria, were almost ruined by their devastating armies. 



434 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Of all their conquests in Europe they retained possession only 
of Russia, which remained subject to the great khan until 
about 1480, when the prince of Moscow threw off the Mongol 
yoke and successfully maintained his independence. 



CHAPTER XXIV 

THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE; INDUSTRIAL LIFE AND 
COMMERCE; WAYFARING LIFE 

A HISTORY of Europe in the Middle Age would not be com- 
plete if it did not tell us something about how the people lived. 
In the chapter on feudalism we had a glimpse of the life of the 

peasants and of the nobility. Let us now consider 
293. ■' ^ ^~ the rise and life of the middle class — the people 

who lived in the cities. We shall find that the 
cities furnish a romantic and picturesque element in the his- 
tory of the period, and in their government they made an in- 
teresting experiment in democracy, which merits our attention. 
In the Roman empire at its height there were many prosper- 
ous cities, varying, of course, in size. Generally they had a 
vigorous industrial life. There was, in fact, a kind of factory 

system, for slaves, working side by side with free 
Roman Cities, artisans in factories, produced various articles of 

commerce. Their prosperity had its source in 
their flourishing industries and commerce. The formation of 
great estates (latifundia) , however, had a most disastrous effect 
on them, because as the people lost their economic independence 
and freedom and sank into the position of coloni (perpetual 
renters), they lost their powers of production and consequently 
also their purchasing power. Under those conditions commerce 
and industry dwindled and the prosperity of the cities declined. 
Their ruin was made complete by the heavy taxes imposed on 
them by the emperors and by the invasions of the barbarians. 
Some cities were even deserted by their inhabitants and fell 
into decay. Others, though not entirely ruined, suffered a 
great loss in their population and sank into insignificance. 
Industries ceased, factories went out of existence, and there 
was a rapid decHne in technical skill. People returned to 

435 



436 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

primitive conditions, for, since they were unable to buy, each 
one was compelled to make in a crude way his tools and clothing. 
The cities of Italy suffered less than those in other parts of 
the west and they were also the first to begin to recover from 
the general ruin. As the invasions ceased and order was some- 
what restored, commerce gradually revived, and the condition 
of the cities improved. 

New cities also arose, growing out of settlements made 
about a church, or monastery, or market, or in the neighbor- 
hood of a castle, or in some convenient spot on a river or on the 
coast. Nobles, seeing the advantages to be de- 
Founded, rived from having a city on their lands, frequently 

c T, founded a new city and offered special favors to all 

b. u., 292, 293. -^ ^ 

who would come and settle in it. The population 
of the cities was increased by the number of serfs who ran away 
from their lords and sought to hide themselves in the cities. 
Of course their lords frequently tried to recover them, but the 
inhabitants of the cities sheltered them and it became an 
established principle that if a serf should remain in a city un- 
molested for a year and a day he thereby acquired his freedom. 
The growth of a city was generally dependent on the growth 
of its commerce, and with the great increase in commerce after 
the eleventh century many cities entered on a period of rapid 
growth and prosperity. Naturally, the greater the commercial 
advantages of a city, the more rapid was its growth. 

We must at the outset try to get an idea of the make-up of 
the population of a mediaeval town or city. It seldom happened 
that all the people of a town possessed the same degree of 

freedom, or belonged to the same lord, or lived ac- 
Groups. „ Tc 1 • 1 

cordmg to the same law. If the city was the seat 

g/. S^B., 296. ^£ ^ |3Js]^Qp^ there would be a large number of people 
Cf. R., 169, there who were dependent wholly or in part on him 
and subject to his jurisdiction. This group would 
consist of serfs, or unfree, of common freemen, and possibly 
even of nobles. If the king or emperor had a palace or fortress 
in the city, there would also be a similar group of people de- 
pendent on him and governed by his official called the *'bur- 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 437 

grave." A rich church or -monastery within the city would 
also have a similar group, and if a great baron had his castle 
in or near the city there would also be a similar group dependent 
on him. There might also be a number of freemen as well as 
of nobles within the city's walls. This diversity in the popula- 
tion added complexity to every movement within the city and 
made it impossible for a mediaeval town to have the unity which 
we find in the cities of modern times. 

In the time of Charlemagne each town formed a part of the 
county in which it was situated, and, like the rest of the county, 
was governed by the king's official, a count, who might be 
Counts either an ecclesiastic or a layman. Almost every 

Govern the bishop was also a count and performed the duties 
of that office. Local self-government was unknown, 
.,7. II. ^^ inhabitants having no voice in the management 
of public affairs. Now, as feudalism developed, the count nat- 
urally became the lord of the town as he did of the county. 
The inhabitants of the towns, or at least a large part of them, 
lost a certain degree of their personal freedom and came to be 
regarded as having much the same relation to their lord as did 
the serfs in the country. That is, as the serf was attached to 
the soil, so the inhabitants of the town had no right to move 
from one town to another without the consent of their lord. 
Gradually, in the administration of affairs, the town was sepa- 
rated from the rest of the county, and the town with its inhab- 
itants was set in contrast with the country and its inhabitants. 
The latter were known as peasants and serfs, and the former, 
from the fact that they lived in cities, we may call "citizens." 

The inhabitants of the cities, after submitting for a cen- 
The Commu- ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^ arbitrary rule of their lords, 
nalMove- began to resist it. Generally the lord insisted on 

ment. , .*= . , , / 

his customary rights, and the people rose m arms 
Rebe?^'^^ and expelled him and his officials from the city. 
^ , The following account of what took place in Co- 

Cologne, 1074. ° • J r I. 

logne in the year 1074 will give some idea of the 
^■^"^°^'^°^ extraordinary rights of the lord of the city and 
of the manner in which the people rebelled. 



438 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The archbishop spent Easter in Cologne with his friend, the 
bishop of Miinster, whom he had invited to celebrate the festival 
with him. When the bishop was ready to go home, the archbishop 
ordered his servants to get a suitable boat ready for him. They 
looked all about, and finally found a good boat which belonged to 
a rich merchant of the city, and demanded it for the archbishop's 
use. They ordered it to be got ready at once, and threw out all the 
merchandise, with which it was loaded. The merchant's servants, 
who had charge of the boat, resisted, but the archbishop's men 
threatened them with violence, unless they immediately obeyed. 
The merchant's servants hastily ran to their lord and told him what 
had happened to the boat, and asked him what they should do. 
The merchant had a son who was both bold and strong. He was 
related to the great families of the city, and, because of his char- 
acter, was very popular. He hastily collected his servants and as 
many of the young men of the city as he could, rushed to the boat, 
ordered the archbishop's servants to get out of it, and violently 
ejected them from it. The advocate of the city was called in, but 
his arrival only increased the tumult, and the merchant's son drove 
him off and put him to flight. The friends of both parties seized 
arms and came to their aid, and it looked as if a great battle was 
going to be fought in the city. The news of the struggle was car- 
ried to the archbishop, who immediately sent men to quell the riot, 
and being very angry, he threatened the young men with dire 
punishment in the next session of court. . . . The riot in the city 
was finally quieted a little, but the young man, who was very angry 
as well as elated over his success, kept on making all the dis- 
turbance he could. He went about the city making speeches to the 
people about the harsh government of the archbishop, whom he 
accused of laying unjust burdens on the people, of depriving inno- 
cent persons of their property, and of insulting honorable citizens 
with his violent and offensive words. ... It was not difficult for 
him to raise a mob. . . . Besides, the inhabitants of Cologne all 
regarded it as a great and glorious deed on the part of the people 
of Worms that they had driven out their bishop because he was 
governing them too rigidly. And since they were more numerous 
and wealthy than the people of Worms, and had arms, they dis- 
liked to have it thought that they were not equal to the people 
of Worms in courage, and it seemed to them a disgrace to submit 
like women to the rule of the archbishop, who was governing them 
in a tyrannical manner. 

As soon as the government of the feudal lord in a city was 
thus overthrown the people set up one of their own. Although 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 439 

there were many variations in details, in general outline these 

local governments (called communal, republican, 
Government, democratic) were much the same everywhere, con- 
s B 316 317 listing generally of a mayor, or burgomaster, and a 

city council, or board of aldermen. Not all the in- 
habitants of a town had the right to vote for these officials, the 
franchise being generally limited to the members of the most 

important guilds. This limited citizenship led to 
Suffrage. ^^^g ^^^ riotous disturbances in the cities, because 

the lower guilds of artisans demanded a share in the 
government, but were refused. They then resorted to force, 
and eventually, often after years of civil strife in the city, 
generally succeeded in obtaining a voice and share in the 
government. 

In addition to these disturbances over the right to a share 
in the government there were many others, arising from the 
problems of city government, such as are connected with 
-, ., r finance, police, the administration of justice, and 
Communal partisanship in elections and in the management of 

affairs. There were many dishonest officials who 
were guilty of theft, fraud, and peculation. Party feeling was 
so intense that riotous disorder and violence in the streets were 
common. With these conditions the city police was never able 
to cope. And when a party was successful in the elections and 
got control of the city government, instead of giving all its at- 
tention to an effort to provide good government, it began to 
scheme to retain its power and offices and to keep its opponents 
out. It is apparent, therefore, that this experiment in com- 
munal government was not a success. 

The fate of the cities was different in different countries. 
In Italy, where there was no central government, the cities 
maintained their complete independence and sovereignty, 

and remained city-states. But the democratic gov- 
cftiesin^taly. ernmcnt gradually broke down in them, and the 

power was usurped by some local family (as the 
Scala family in Verona, the Visconti and Sforza families in 
Milan, the Medici family in Florence). These new govern- 



440 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ments, although often tyrannical, were in some respects better 
than the democratic governments which they displaced. At 
any rate the change made the government more stable and 
put an end to the violent factions within the walls. 

In France, as the central government grew strong, the king 
took advantage of the disorder in the cities to seize their govern- 
ment and to deprive them of all the liberties which they pos- 
^ ^ sessed. As the king's officials displaced those 

In France. . . ° . ^ 

elected by the citizens, the cities lost their in- 
dependence and came completely under the king's control 
(about 1300), thereby adding to the power and resources of the 
crown. 

In Germany there was much greater variation in the status 

of the cities, and it is difficult to make a general statement 

about them. But it may be said that they acquired a greater 

degree of local independence and self-government, 

e many. ^^^ retained them longer than did the cities of 

s. B., 301-307, France. Yet they never attained that degree of 
310-313. J p_ 

sovereignty which was reached by the cities of 
Italy. For in Germany all the cities, even the most inde- 
pendent, acknowledged the emperor as their lord. In some 
cases, however, this was a mere form and they really governed 
themselves like free republics. A few of the imperial cities 
became sovereign states, and two of them at least, Hamburg and 
Bremen, were little city-republics and sovereign members of 
the German empire. 

The city walls and the style of architecture of the houses 
gave the mediaeval city a unique and interesting appearance. 
Barbarian invasions and constant feuds between the cities 

and their neighbors made it necessary for the city 
City Walls. ^Q protect itself by means of walls. These were fur- 
Narrow ther strengthened by moats, towers, and fortresses, 
Streets. ^^^ were decorated with battlements which also 
Houses. offered protection to those who fought from the 

top of the wall. As it was necessary to economize 
space, the streets were generally narrow, and the houses tall, 
often having five or six stories. The houses were usually con- 



1 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 441 

structed in a curious way^ each upper story jutting out for 
some distance beyond the one below it, so that the highest 
stories almost met over the street. Space within the walls 
was so valuable that no provision could be made for parks 
and pleasure-grounds, except outside the gates. There was 

usually, however, a small open space or square, 

in front of the city hall, which served as the meet- 
ing-place for the people, for public entertainments, and for a 
market. Walls and narrow streets diminished the comfort 
and cramped the life of the inhabitants. 

It is difficult for us to imagine the filthy and unsanitary con- 
dition of the streets. There were no sewers. If a stream 
flowed through the town, it served as a sewer. The streets 

were generally unpaved and in wet weather were no 
Sanitation. doubt almost impassable with mud and filth. The 

following quotation from the contract between the 
mayor of Siena and the man who had bought the right to clean 
the market-place (nothing is said of cleaning the streets) will 
give some idea of the character and efficiency of the "street 
cleaning department" of that city. Probably the condition 
of the market-place of Siena was neither better nor worse than 
that of the market place of other cities. 

In the year 1296, October the ninth, I, Segnalini, mayor of 
Siena, ... in the name of the government of Siena, sell, give, and 
grant to you, John Vetture, of the ward which is called St. Martin's, 
all the sweepings, garbage, and waste stuff [that is, scattered grain, 
vegetables, etc., left in the market placel which you can get by 
sweeping the market place and the paved spaces around it, from 
now to the twenty-eighth day of next September. . . . Likewise, 
and for the same length of time, I give and grant to you the right 
to keep a sow and four pigs in the market place to eat up the waste 
stuff left there. . . . And I give and grant you the full permission 
and authority to sweep and clean the said market place and the 
paved spaces around it, and to have all the sweepings . . . and 
the waste stuff, and all that goes with the sweepings of the said 
market place,* etc. 

* Translation of the original document in Latin, which is printed in 
L. Zdekauer, La Vita Puhhlica dei Senesi net dugento, conferenza tenuta, 
10 Aprile, 1897, pp. 116^. 



442 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

The endless variety of "ready-made" articles for all sorts 
of purposes, and the ease with which we can secure them, make 
it difficult for us to realize that the mediaeval man lacked all 
such things. In our great stores we can find hun- 
Made"; dreds of articles which we think are necessary to us, 

ivSde^'^ but which were entirely unknown to him. For we 

must remember that the industrial life that had 
flourished in the Greek and Roman cities had ceased when the 
people lost their economic freedom and had become impov- 
erished. Everything was "home-made" and "hand-made." 
There were no great factories and no manufacturing machin- 
ery, and the only source of power was that of water and wind, 
and these were used chiefly in mills for grinding. The peasant 
grew flax and hemp and his wife spun and wove them into linen, 
and the wool from his sheep she wove into yarn or cloth. Skins 
of animals, either wild or domestic, he fashioned into clothing 
and covering for the feet. The tools which he needed in his 
daily work he made himself. In fact, he made everything that 
he used. Consequently we can be sure that most of his 
tools were of wood, because it was difficult to work in iron. 

There were two kinds of work that were extremely important, 
yet difficult, requiring more or less training and practice: 
the art of pottery-making and blacksmithing, or working 
,,.„ in iron. Because of their difficult character and 

Village 

Blacksmith their importance it is probable that some villages 
or communities hired a "village" blacksmith and a 
"village" potter, and, in return for the meagre salary which 
they paid him, the smith did all their iron work, which was no 
doubt simple in character, and the potter made their earthen- 
ware, for which there was, of course, a large and constant 
demand. 

In the monasteries and on the estates of the great landlords 
there were probably more and better tools, because the large 
number of monks and serfs made it possible to have some men 
devote themselves exclusively to the work of making the re- 
quired tools and implements. We learn this from an interesting 
document of Charlemagne, about 800, in which he gave minute 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 443 

directions to the men whom he set as stewards over his 
lands. ^ He ordered the stewards to have, each in his own 
S ecializa- district, blacksmiths, goldsmiths, silversmiths, shoe- 
tion on makers, tailors, saddlers, lathe workers, carpenters, 

makers of shields and coats of mail, fishermen, fowl- 
ers, soapmakers, beer-brewers, makers of apple cider and pear 
cider, bakers who knew how to bake rolls, makers of nets 
for trapping wild animals and catching fish and birds, "and 
many other kinds of workmen too numerous to mention." 
Here it is evident that the process of specialization was well be- 
gun again, and certain kinds of work were developing into 
trades. It is also quite clear that each district, just as each 
peasant, was to be entirely self-sufficient, since its inhabitants 
supplied all their own needs. 

Gradually, as villages were established and increased in 
population, the process of specialization was necessarily quick- 
ened. In the villages and cities there grew up for the first time 

during the Middle Age a class of free working men 
trial Class. who, sincc they had no connection with the soil, had 

to make a living with their hands. These became 
the industrial class. It became necessary for the members of 
a family to produce more than they needed for their own per- 
sonal use, and to produce articles for which there would be 
a demand more or less general. The first difficulty which such 
a class met was in finding purchasers for the products of their 
labor. There was no storekeeping class to act as middlemen, 
buying the products of the labor of others and selling them to 
the consumer. Hence, those who made articles for sale were 
compelled also to sell them. The workshop became also the 
salesroom. In order to bring maker and consumer together 
markets, or ''fairs," were held, and after about 1000 A. D. these 
rapidly increased in number and importance. Better facili- 
ties of selling naturally enlarged the profits of this sort of pro- 
duction, and so the industrial, or artisan, class increased in 
numbers. At the same time not only the agricultural class 
was growing in numbers, but the amount of land under cultiva- 
tion was constantly increasing, and better methods of agricul- 



444 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

ture were developed. Consequently, the agricultural class, 
having more farm products for sale or exchange, were able to 
buy many better articles and more cheaply than they could 
themselves make them. So specialization tended to become 
more and more the rule, and the articles improved in quality. 

It was not probable that the artisans would ever be able to 
glut the market with their home-made articles, because the 
method of making everything by hand was slow and raw ma- 
terials were expensive. We are told that in the 
Small Output, fourteenth century a ton of iron in England cost 
about $500; a thousand weavers, working a whole 
year, could produce about five thousand bolts of cloth, the 
monthly output of a good modern woollen-mill; and toward the 
end of the fifteenth century a master locksmith required two 
weeks to make a good lock. So, no matter how clever the work- 
men were, their output would necessarily be small. Not content 
with the natural protection which the existing conditions af- 
forded them, the industrial class sought to improve their situa- 
tion by artificial means. They organized themselves into asso- 
ciations, called guilds, the chief purposes of which were to se- 
cure a monopoly both in the manufacture and in the sale of 
their products, and to obtain freedom from tolls. In the Middle 
Age free trade was unknown, and tolls were heavy and burden- 
some, for each town and market sought to tax every article that 
was brought in and offered for sale. 

These guilds had a profound influence on mediaeval life be- 
cause they included in their membership nearly all the in- 
habitants of a town. 

The aristocracy, that is, the merchants and bankers, be- 
longed to merchant guilds; the laborers and artisans, who sold 
the product of their labors, belonged to craft guilds. The 
^ ., , merchant guilds tried to secure a monopoly of trade 

Guilds. . , . . .111 1 rr.1 e J 

m the town and m its neighborhood. They refused 
to permit a travelling merchant to sell his wares in the town, 
because, as they said, the public could not be protected against 
deception in the quality of the goods; for when such a foreigner 
had left the town it would be almost impossible to punish him 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 445 

for having misrepresented' his wares. For the same reason 
craft guilds were organized to secure a monopoly in the trades 
and industries of the town. Thus only the members of the 
guild of shoemakers were permitted to make and sell shoes. 
A ntice When a boy had chosen the trade which he wished 
Journeyman, to foUow, he was apprenticed to a master in it. 

^Master 

After he had finished his apprenticeship, which 
lasted from two to ten years, according to the character 
of the trade, he became a journeyman, and was permitted 
to work at his trade, not independently but in the shop of 
a master. After serving as a skilled laborer for a number of 
years, if he gave evidence of having the proper character, he 
might, by a vote of the masters in his guild, establish himself as 
a master with a business of his own. In order to prevent com- 
petition the guild strictly limited and regulated the number of 
apprentices and masters. 

In the early Middle Age there was little commerce, and 
consequently each city had to supply its own wants by means 
of its local manufactures and industries. Gradually, however, 
^ , . commerce increased, and it became possible for a 

Industnes. . "^ 

City to sell a part of its products and to buy articles 
which it could not produce. Each city then developed those 
industries which it could practise most advantageously. Thus, 
fishing became the chief occupation of the inhabitants of the 
towns along the seashore and on the great inland seas; some 
of the Baltic cities had an important trade in amber; the 
Flemish cities grew rich from weaving; other cities became 
famous for their leathers and furs; and still others for their 
work in metals. 

We have seen that commerce was ruined when the people 
lost their economic freedom and became coloni. Then for some 
centuries the invasions of the barbarians, heavy taxation, bad 

roads, robbers, the lack of police protection, the 
Commerce, ^^^k of money as a medium of exchange, and the 

heavy tolls collected in harbors, at bridges, at city 
gates and at innumerable points along the roads, made commerce 
on a large scale impossible. ThQ imrnediate effect of this was, 



446 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

as we have seen, that each community, often indeed each fam- 
ily, had to produce enough to supply all its wants. Such was 
the condition of affairs until after the year icxx), when commerce 
began to increase rapidly. During this early period of the 
Middle Age we must not suppose, however, that there was no 
commerce at all. Silks and other textile fabrics, perfumes, in- 
cense, spices, nutmegs, cloves, pepper, jewels, pearls, precious 
stones, and other articles from southern and eastern Asia, 
were brought by adventurous merchants to the west and found 
their way into remote parts of Europe. In return, the Euro- 
peans gave many kinds of fur, amber, slaves, hunting falcons, 
woollen cloth, and other articles. 

There were several well-defined routes of travel which this 
commerce followed. From the Baltic one route led by way of 
Lake Ladoga and the Volga River to the Caspian, and thence 

to China. Another followed the Dnieper to the 
RoutS'^^^^ Black Sea, thence to the east, passing either north 

or south of the Caucasus, or to the southeast 
through Asia Minor. From central Germany merchants could 
go by way of the Danube and the Black Sea to Constantinople, 
and from that point they had a choice of routes, either by way 
of the Black Sea, or through Asia Minor, or by boat to any of 
the Mediterranean porft. From France, Spain, Italy, and 
northern Africa the Mediterranean furnished the safest and 
most convenient routes, with a wide range of ports to choose 
from, according to the character of the merchant's wares. 
The routes to India and the East Indies went either overland 
to the Euphrates and on through Persia, or by the Red Sea 
and the Indian Ocean. From the Mediterranean to England 
and northwest Europe a merchant could go by way of one of 
the passes in the Alps, or by the Rhone, or by boat through 
the strait of Gibraltar. It was not customary for merchants 
to make the whole journey from the far east to the far west, 
but the merchandise was carried by one merchant over the 
territory with which he was familiar and then sold to an- 
other merchant, who continued the journey. In this way the 
Mohammedan peoples of central and western Asia acted ,as 



Note to Map XX. — This map shows the locations of the chief towns of 
the later Middle Age, the more important connections by land routes, and 
the sea routes around Europe and to the east. The dotted lines surround 
groups of cities which were bound together in leagues at different times, 
Venice and Genoa virtually monopolized the trade through the Mediter- 
ranean to the east; their vessels picked up cargoes at Constantinople, An- 
tioch, Alexandria, and other eastern Mediterranean ports, and carried them 
back to northern Italy; from here the goods were transported across the 
Alps to the upper waters of the German rivers or to southern France, and 
so were passed on to all parts of Europe. Each important town on the way 
was a distributing centre for its region; such were Milan, Augsburg, Cologne, 
Troyes (the fairs of Champagne), Paris, Bruges, London, etc. The Hanseatic 
towns of northern Germany controlled the trade with the Baltic regions, 
the Scandinavian peninsula, and the interior of Russia, exchanging manu- 
factured goods and products of the south and east for the raw materials of 
these northern lands (fish, furs, lumber, grain). Manufacturing industries 
naturally sprang up in towns along the trade routes. The factors in the 
growth of commercial towns, therefore, were: location on a main trade 
route, position as a distributing centre, and development of industries. 




pich 20 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 447 

middlemen between the east and the west. The Greeks, with 
Constantinople as their chief city, had a sharp rivalry with the 
Italian cities for the carrying trade. 

In this commerce the Jews not only had a very extensive 
part; they were also pioneers in it. They possessed great ability 
for merchandising; they were adventurous travellers; and, 

through their widely scattered kinship and their 
Commerce, faithfulness and helpfulness to others of their race, 

they were able to establish business connections 
from the east to the west. By pack and by horse they carried 
their wares throughout western Europe and so became an 
important commercial factor. A city that admitted Jews as 
residents immediately acquired importance as a commercial 
centre. 

In the eleventh century commerce began to increase, and, 
after the crusaders had established their principalities in the 
east, it assumed large proportions. Although the northern 

route from the Baltic to the east was closed about 
Commerce, ^he same time by the invasions of hostile tribes, 

commerce along all the other routes constantly 
grew in volume and importance. In this increasing commerce 
the cities on the Mediterranean naturally had exceptional 
opportunities to share. The cities of Italy especially made the 
most of their fortunate situation and rapidly grew rich. Not 
only did this commerce increase in volume; it also opened up 
many new routes and new markets, and came to embrace many 
new articles. This commerce led to the period of voyage and 
discovery, and hence to the discovery of America. 

There was some opposition to this commerce, however, 
for various popes, regarding all traffic with Mohammedans as 

injurious to the cause of the crusades, frequently 
position.^ prohibited it, although their prohibitions had little 

effect. In 11 98 Innocent III wrote a letter to the 
Venetians as follows: 

In support of the eastern province (that is, the crusader states) 
... we have renewed that decree of the Lateran council (held 
under Alexander III, 1179), which excommunicated those Christians 



448 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

who shall furnish the Saracens with weapons, iron, or timbers for 
their galleys, and those who serve the Saracens as helmsmen or in 
any other way on their galleys and piratical craft, and which further- 
more ordered that their property be confiscated by the secular 
princes and the consuls of the cities, and that, if any such persons 
should be taken prisoner, they should be the slaves of those who 
capture them. We furthermore excommunicated all those Chris- 
tians who shall hereafter have anything to do with the Saracens 
either directly or indirectly, or shall attempt to give them aid in 
any way so long as the war between them and us shall last. But 
recently our beloved sons, Andrew Donatus, and Benedict Grilion, 
your messengers, came and explained to us that your city was suf- 
fering great loss by this our decree, because Venice does not en- 
gage in agriculture, but in shipping and commerce. Nevertheless, 
we are led by the paternal love which we have for you to forbid 
you to aid the Saracens by selling them, giving them, or exchang- 
ing with them, iron, flax (oakum), pitch, edged tools, rope, weapons, 
galleys, ships and timbers, whether hewn or in the rough. But for 
the present and till we order to the contrary, we permit those who 
are going to Egypt to carry other kinds of merchandise whenever 
it shall be necessary. 

The desire for gain, however, was so strong, that all other 
considerations had little or no influence. 

The immediate effect of this commerce was a great increase 
in wealth. The cities which engaged in it grew rich and proud 
and entered on a period of great prosperity. The people 
seem to have known how to enjoy, for they spent 
Lu?ury.^^ their money lavishly on fine buildings, artistic 
furniture and household equipment, on works of 
art, magnificent dress, and brilliant private and public social 
functions. In accordance with their wealth the cities began to 
play an important role in public affairs. To clear the roads 
of robbers, the sea of pirates, and to secure adequate police 
protection, the cities of Germany and of all northwestern 
Europe entered into an alliance, which, called the Hanseatic 
league, became a great political as well as a civilizing power. 

The economic and civilizing work of the Italian cities was 
materially limited by the bitter and senseless rivalry in which 
they indulged. The mediaeval city and the mediaeval merchant 
had no conception of free and honorable competition. If they 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 449 

met a competitor in the field, they thought only of destroying 
him. So, when the merchants of two cities came into competi- 
tion for trade, they resorted to arms. In this way 
fo'wa.T. ^^ ^ ^^^ ^^^^^ another of the Italian cities v,as con- 
quered by its more powerful neighbor and rival and 
its commerce diminished or ruined. Finally Venice and Genoa 
engaged in a deadly rivalry for commercial supremacy. For 
more than a hundred years they were engaged in a more or less 
desultory warfare, which was profitable to neither and ruinous 
to both. But in 1380 the Venetians destroyed the Genoese 
fleet and from that time Venice was without a rival in the west. 
In the meantime, however, the Osman Turks had been extend- 
ing their conquests westward and when Venice had destroyed 
her last western rival she found herself face to face with them 
— a stronger, more relentless foe. The Turks not only took her 
eastern lands from her, but also successfully closed the eastern 
markets against her merchants, and so put an end to her pros- 
perity. Turkish domination of the eastern Mediterranean mar- 
kets meant Turkish monopoly in the handling of all Asiatic prod- 
ucts and this had a far-reaching effect on the world's history. 
It broke the power of Venice and from the commercial ruin 
that gradually overtook her she never recovered; and it also 
awakened in the minds of sailors the idea and the desire of 
finding a new route to the markets of India, the East Indies, 
and China, and thus led the Portuguese to find the route to 
India by way of the Cape of Good Hope and Columbus to dis- 
cover America. 

Markets, or fairs, as they were called, had an important 
place in mediaeval commerce because they brought together 
those who wished to sell and those who wished to buy, and 
Markets they no doubt added much to the life of a town. 
At first they were held on holidays (Sundays and 
^ "^ ' saints' days). FericB, from which the word "fair" 
is derived, meant originally "holidays," but came to mean 
the fairs or markets which were held on those days. Since on 
such days the churches were the natural meeting-places of the 
people, markets were held in the church squares, and some- 



4SO EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

times even in the churches themselves. Some towns held fairs 
once a week, others once a month, others twice a year, and 
still others once a year. Some of the annual fairs continued 
for two months and were attended by thousands of merchants 
and people who came from hundreds of miles around. In 
fact, some merchants spent their time travelling from one fair to 
another. The value of such fairs in the development of the 
economic and intellectual life of the Middle Age was in part 
offset by the fact that they served to spread all sorts of con- 
tagious diseases, including the plague. 

Many of these fairs preserved their fame until well into the 
nineteenth century. Better shipping facilities and improved 
means of travel and communication (railroads, steamboats, 
and the postal system) finally destroyed their importance. 
In Europe they have diminished in numbers, till now only three 
great annual fairs are held there; one at Beaucaire in France, 
another at Leipzig in Germany, and the third at Nijni-Nov- 
gorod in Russia. Of these the largest as well as the most pic- 
turesque is at Nijni-Novgorod, its sales amounting each year 
to more than $100,000,000. In Asia and in Africa, where rail- 
roads and steamboats are almost unknown, such fairs are still 
held and have lost none of their economic importance. 

In mediaeval life there were present certain social elements 
and features which added immensely to the picturesqueness 
of it. In the first place, the church had a large number of holy 
days, most of which were holidays, and all of them 
Procession^. ^^^^ Utilized for processions and joyous gatherings 
and celebrations. In the spring the priest headed 
an interested and eager procession throughout all the country- 
side to bless the fields and to pray for a rich harvest. And 
every city had a patron saint whose day all the citizens cele- 
brated as a holiday with processions and festivities made gay 
with song and dance. Civic pride brought out all the citizen- 
ship, and the guilds and other associations vied with one an- 
other in the brilliance and magnitude of their display. Every 
guild had its patron saint, too, and when his day came it was 
given up to a celebration that was characterized by feasting, 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 451 

dancing, and general hilarity. Brilliantly colored robes and 
banners made all such processions attractive to the eye. We 
may be sure that the streets in those days were far richer in 
picturesque and entertaining sights than are those of. to-day. 
And in one respect we may really envy the inhabitants of a 
mediaeval city: they were not so overwhelmed with business 
that they did not have leisure to enjoy the pleasures which 
the days brought them.* 

Means of travel and communication have always been an 
important factor in civilization. In the Middle Age, in the 
absence of a regular, efficient postal system, of the telephone 
Means of and telegraph, and of what we now call rapid tran- 
^^^^' sit, it is evident that travel and travellers were 

Waterways, almost the Only means of disseminating news and 
ideas. In the streams and rivers of Europe there was a 
ready-made system of highways. An important part of this 
system was composed of the small streams, which now play 
no part in travel. For boats were generally small, since, 
for the most part, they had to be either rowed or "poled." 
Only on the larger streams sails might be used when the winds 
were favorable. Travel by boat might be, on the whole, less 
expensive, less laborious, and less dangerous than travel by 
land, and so no doubt every stream that could float a boat 
comfortably was made to serve the travelling public. So ex- 
tensively were all streams used in this way that it became 
a matter of public concern that they should be kept open for 
travel, and generally it was assumed that the king or ruler 
had the right to control the building of dams, mills, and any- 
thing else that might obstruct the free passage of boats. Endless 
was the litigation and innumerable the appeals to the king over 
the construction and removal of such obstructions in the streams. 
The roads were hardly worthy of the name. They were mere 
trails, ungraded and unpaved, with the exception 
of the old Roman roads, which in the course of 
time wore out. They became impassable in time of heavy 

* Religious processions are now uncommon in Protestant countries, 
but they are still an interesting feature in Catholic lands. 



452 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and continuous rains. They were full of stones, mudhoies, 
ruts, and washes, and only a strongly built vehicle could stand 
the strain of travelling them. There was constant danger that 
a wagon would upset or stick fast in the mud. 

Crossing the streams was a serious problem. Some of the 
smaller ones could be forded. Over others ferries were main- 
tained, and over others bridges were built. Probably out of 
common pity for the traveller because of the notori- 

Bridges. "^ "^ 

ous hardships which he must undergo on the road, 
the building of bridges came to be regarded as a pious work, 
in which the clergy and monks had a special interest. On the 'tj^ 
continent there was even a monkish order which had for its 
object the building and care of bridges and ferries. In Eng- 
land there were guilds formed for the same purpose. The pious 
character of the work is further seen in the fact that a chapel 
was nearly always erected either on the bridge or at one end 
of it, which was dedicated to some saint, who was then regarded 
as the patron saint and guardian of the bridge. Frequently 
some hermit or friar took up his residence on the bridge, col- 
lected tolls, and was supposed to keep it in repair. 

Bridges were built out of funds raised by a tax on the neigh- 
borhood, by tolls collected from passers-by and from boats 
that passed under it, and from gifts that came from many 
sources. Sometimes a monastery or a great lord in the neigh- 
borhood was charged with its construction, or the work was as- 
sumed by a bridge-building order or guild. They were sup- 
posed to be maintained in much the same way, but, as a matter 
of fact, the chronicles of the bridges show that the work of 
maintaining them was generally neglected. Although the funds 
and tolls were constantly collected, some one appropriated them 
to private ends, and they frequently became the subject of 
wearisome litigation. 

Of all the examples of the bridge-builder's art probably the 
London Bridge was the most famous. It was begun in 1179 
on the ruins of an old wooden structure, and was completed in 
1209. An Englishman named Colechurch superintended its 
construction to 1201, when King John called a Frenchman 
named Isembert, a famous bridge-builder, to complete it. All 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 453 

England was excited about the bridge, and gifts and legacies 

poured in on it. On either side of the roadway houses were 

built on the bridge itself, the rentals from which 

London formed a part of the bridge's income. These 

Bridge, ^ " 

117Q-1209. houses were several stories m height and had cel- 
lars and storerooms in the masonry of the piers. 
In one of the arches was a drawbridge to let boats pass. The 
bridge was supplied with a chapel and with towers for defense. 
There are still standing and in use a considerable number of 
bridges built in the Middle Age. One of the finest of these is 
at Cahors, France, built in the thirteenth century. 

Probably the commonest way of travelling was afoot. A 

majority of travellers had not the means to provide themselves 

with a horse. And in the case of a long journey, such as a 

crusade or a pilgrimage or a journey to Rome, it 

On Foot and i • j • 

on Horseback. ^^^ ^^ss expensive and in many ways more con- 
venient to go afoot. The other common way of 
travelling was on horseback. All who could afford this would 
supply themselves with horses and travel as did Chaucer's 
famous story-tellers. The king and the very wealthy had 
heavy, lumbering carriages, which in spite of the pains be- 
stowed on them must have been uncomfortable. For hauling 
their produce strong carts were in common use. 

Such were the roads. Who travelled them? First of all, 
the kings and their courts and messengers and all who were 
sent out on the king's business. We have seen that the kings 
, „ , had no fixed residence, but were constantly mov- 
Travellers. ing about their realms. This was due partly to the 
Kings and ^^^^ that One province after another required their 
Re?n e presence, and partly to the fact that, since their 

living was derived in large measure from their lands, 
which were scattered all over the kingdom, it was easier for 
them to go to their provisions than to transport their provi- 
sions to them at some central place. They were generally ac- 
companied by a large retinue, composed of their counsellors 
or chief advisers, judges, officials, their household attendants, 
and a considerable body-guard. They had the right to re- 
quire the people living along the road to assist them with 



454 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

vehicles and horses. Since the king could not be present every- 
where, it was necessary for him to employ a large number of 
messengers, whom he sent on his business to all parts of his 
kingdom. 

The nobihty also were to be met on the roads in considerable 
numbers. They travelled from one of their estates to an- 
other, to the king's court, to tournaments, as well as for many 
Nobles other purposes. An important contingent of the 

travelling public was composed of the high clergy, 
abbots, monks, and friars. The high clergy, as we 
have seen, had two sets of functions, the one secular, the other 
spiritual, and the interests of both together compelled them to 
do much travelling. Appeals to the pope were numerous, and 
representatives of both sides of a case were generally sent 
to Rome to try to secure the papal decision. During the last 
three centuries of the Middle Age the orders of friars were 
very active and numbers of them were to be met along the 

„ ^ way. The rules of their order forbade them to 

S. B., 271. "^ 

ride on horseback, and, although they sometimes 

evaded the rule, they generally travelled afoot. 

Merchants and peddlers were to be met with everywhere 

,, , as they went from town to town and from mar- 

Merchants. '' 

ket to market. 
During the Middle Age pilgrimages were exceedingly com- 
mon, either as a form of devotion or as penance. Conse- 
. quently there were numerous pilgrims and penitents 

on the road, and the great shrines of Europe were 
visited yearly by thousands. A typical caravan of pilgrims was 
that which Chaucer has immortalized in his Canterbury Tales. 

It is impossible to name all the classes of travellers which 
during the last centuries of the Middle Age made up the 
travelling public, but one more class deserves particular men- 
j^. . tion. This was the large and interesting class of 
Jugglers, ' those who lived by their wits. To this class be- 
longed all those who gained a livelihood by furnish- 
ing some form of entertainment. Among them were musicians 
and strolling players, story-tellers, jugglers, tricksters of all 
sorts, dancers, acrobats, pardoners, dealers in relics and in 



THE CITIES AND CITY LIFE 455 

forged indulgences, petty thieves, and beggars and vagabonds 
of an infinite number of varieties. A dancing bear or a monkey 
was an attractive adjunct which enabled its owner to draw the 
pennies out of the pockets of the gaping crowds. Vagabonds 
were numerous and formed a kind of fraternity, much as do 
the tramps of to-day. By means of cabalistic signs which they 
chalked up along the way they conveyed to their fellows in- 
formation in regard to the sort of reception which they were 
likely to receive at the next house or village. They were 
masters in the art of begging and of deception, and were able 
to simulate all sorts of bodily misfortunes and deformities 
which would make a sympathetic appeal to the purses of those 
whom they met.* 

We can hardly form an adequate conception of the dangers 
that beset the traveller from thieves and robbers. Acts of 
violence were common, and, when occasion offered, were fre- 
quently committed by those who did not gain their 
T?aveT° livelihood by such means. Besides the numerous 
thieves and robbers there were many robber barons 
who levied on all who passed their way. At the close of a war 
mercenary troops who had been engaged in it generally became 
robbers and lived by acts of violence at the expense of others. 
Of inns and hotels, such as they were, there was no lack. 
Most of them were extremely uncomfortable and innkeepers 
were notorious for their sharp practices. Every 
as inifs.^"^^ monastery also served as a hotel and generally pro- 
vided a house outside the monastery walls in which 
travellers could pass the night. It is needless to say that their 
hospitality was often abused. 

* In chapter LI 1 1 of The Cloister and the Hearth Charles Reade has 
given an interesting and truthful picture of some of the tricks of this 
wily class. Indeed, the whole book is worthy of careful reading, be- 
cause it contains in an attractive form so much actual information about 
the roads, inns, the travelling public, and the dangers that beset the trav- 
eller. 



CHAPTER XXV 
CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

There were in the Middle Age so many movements and 
forces that were destructive in their effects that it seems, at 
the first glance, that there could have been very little civiliza- 
tion and culture. There were in the first place the invasions 
of barbarians, who throughout a large part of the period har- 
ried and ravaged the more civilized portions of Europe. Merely 
to mention them — the Huns, the Germans, the Slavs, the 
Hungarians, the Saracens, the Northmen, the Normans, the 
Turks, the Tatars and Mongols — calls up a series of pictures 
of wanton and wide-spread ruin. Scarcely less destructive were 
the numerous wars, private, civil, and international. Nation 
was set against nation, city against city, noble against noble, 
noble against city, class against class, as in the peasants* up- 
risings. The forces that made for protection and order in the 
feudal state were notoriously inadequate. Hunger and famine 
also did their deadly work. There was no intelligent treatment 
of the sick and epidemics and plagues raged incessantly. 

Yet in spite of the desolation wrought by these destructive 
forces, the Middle Age produced a civilization that makes a 
strong appeal to us. Besides the civilizing forces which, as 
we have seen, were centred in the cities, there were others, 
such as the legacy of Rome, in the form of literature, law, and 
ideals; the church, with her great system of doctrines, practices, 
and ideals, and with her army of clergy, monks, and friars; 
the literature of the church and of feudalism; schools and uni> 
versities; and the fine arts — architecture, sculpture, and paint- 
ing. These will now engage our attention. 

In discussing the civilization of the Middle Age we are con- 
fronted with serious difficulties. In the first place, the" peoples 
of the different countries were not on the same plane of civiliza- 

4S6 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 457 

tion, so that what was true of one of them might not be true 
of the others; and furthermore, the peoples were making prog- 
ress all the time, so that what was true of a people in the early 
Middle Age would not be true of them in a later period. Per- 
haps it will be more satisfactory, therefore, for us to look at 
the forces which were operating to civiHze the peoples rather 
than to attempt to describe in detail the successive stages of 
civiHzation to which the people of each country attained. 

First of all the ci\dlizing agencies, we must consider the 
Christian church, because, in many ways, its influence was 
exerted for the betterment of the people. It develop>ed a 
^, ^, , system of reliofious belief and practice which un- 

The Church. "^ ^ 

doubtedly had a civilizing influence on the rude 
nations of Europe. Its system of morals and its standards 
of conduct, although not perfect, were nevertheless uplifting. 
The church was the guardian of learning and the promoter of 
all the arts, and many of the greatest men and women of the 
Middle Age — the men and women who appealed most strongly 
to the popular imagination and admiration, and who were 
therefore great civilizers — were living embodiments of the vir- 
tues which the church taught. Furthermore, the church re- 
garded it as her duty to watch over every individual from the 
cradle to the grave, and she surrounded him with an ample 
machinery, or apparatus, for effecting his salvation. This ma- 
chinery she put into the hands of the clergy, who were, by vir- 
tue of their ordination, given a peculiar power over the opera- 
tion of it. 

At its height the church possessed a remarkable organiza- 
tion, which brought every individual into contact with the 
clergy. The whole land — including country, villages, and cities 
— was divided into parishes, over each of which was 
lio^^^^^^^' a priest, whose duty it was to minister to the spiri- 
tual needs of its inhabitants. A number of parishes 
were grouped together to form a diocese, or bishopric, over 
which a bishop presided, whose duty it was to oversee the 
parish clergy. In the same way dioceses or bishoprics were 
grouped together to form an archdiocese, or archbishopric, over 



458 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

which an archbishop presided, whose duty it was to oversee the 
bishops. Over the archbishops was the pope, with supreme 
authority over all. With such an organization the church ex- 
tended her influence even to the most remote rural regions, 
and none could escape it. , 

In addition to the clergy, the church had at her disposal a great 
army of monks, who, in a way, re-enforced the clergy and ma- 
terially aided in the work of Christianizing and civilizing Europe. 
Although monks were reckoned with the clergy 
CivUiz^eS ^.nd were spoken of as a part of the regular clergy, 
a large part of them were merely laymen who had 
taken the monastic vows. Only a small percentage of them 
became priests by receiving ordination. These monks were 
established on the dangerous frontier, where their monasteries 
were built like fortresses and were able to resist a severe attack 
of the hostile or rebellious barbarians. Monks were generally 
the first colonists to enter a conquered territory, carrying with 
them not only the gospel and learning but also the civilizing 
arts, trades, and vocations. They were leaders in agriculture 
and introduced the culture of many grains, fruits, and plants. 
They were the great builders and called all the fine and practical 
arts to their aid in beautifying their churches. They wrought in 
iron, silver, and gold. In their gardens grew all sorts of me- 
dicinal herbs as well as a great variety of vegetables. They 
spun and wove. In short, there was no existing art or craft 
which the monks did not make known to the barbarians among 
whom they settled. And, above all, although admitting 
the weaknesses and backslidings of the monks, we must not 
forget the moral and religious uplift which they communicated 
to the people about them. 

In the course of some centuries the church had worked out 
and formulated a system of religious belief, or a creed, and a sys- 
tem of sacraments, and to the clergy were intrusted 
Sacramelfts. ^^^^ ^he guardianship of the creed and the opera- 
tion of the sacraments. It was the duty of the clergy 
to teach the creed and to prevent any one from entertaining 
a belief that was opposed to it. The salvation of the individual 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 459 

was closely bound up with. his acceptance of the true faith and 
with the operation of the sacraments, of which there were 
seven. 

Baptism was, in a way, the door into the church; it was 
performed on an adult when he professed his faith in Christ 
„ . and on a new-born babe. The church taught that 

Baptism. . , ^ 

all the descendants of Adam shared in his sin, and 
that baptism washed away this sin as well as all that the in- 
dividual had committed up to the time of baptism. 

When the child came to years of understanding — about 
twelve years of age — he received the sacrament of confirmation, 
the purpose of which was to increase in him the sanctifying 

grace which would keep him from sinning and give 

him strength to believe and uphold the faith. In 
this sacrament the bishop, who alone could perform it, laid his 
hand on the head of the candidate for confirmation and anointed 
his head with oil. 

But baptism and confirmation, which could be performed 
on the same individual but once, were not able to prevent him 
from committing further sin. To cover this sin, there were 

two sacraments, penance and the eucharist. Pen- 

Penaixce. 

ance is a sacrament by which those who have com- 
mitted sins, by confessing them with true repentance and with 
a sincere purpose of making satisfaction to God, are absolved 
from their sins by the priest. As a sacrament it consists of 
four parts: the sinner must repent, or feel contrition for his 
sins, confess them to the priest, and make whatever satisfac- 
tion the priest may lay on him; the fourth part is performed 
by the priest, who absolves the penitent from his sins. 

The sacrament of the eucharist, or the mass, took the form 
of the consecration of the bread and wine into the body and 

blood of Christ and the offering them up to God as 
or Mass. ' a sacrifice to secure grace and the pardon of sin. 
Marriage ^^ ^^^ ^^^ central part of public worship. 

By the sacrament of marriage husband and 
wife were united in the bonds of holy matrimony, which could 
never be sundered. 



46o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

In the sacrament of extreme (last) unction, which was ad- 
ministered only on the approach of death, and con- 
UnctioiL sisted in the application of holy oil, the soul was 
freed from sin and strengthened to undergo the 
ordeal of death. 

Finally, there was the fundamental sacrament of ordina- 
tion, by which the priests were consecrated to their sacred 
functions and received the sacerdotal, or priestly, character, 
^ -. . which empowered them to perform the sacraments 

Ordination. ^ . 

effectively. For it is a part of the sacramental 
system that the sacraments can be administered effectively 
only by those who, by ordination, have received the sacer- 
dotal character. By ordination, therefore, priests were sharply 
separated from laymen and put into a special class. The gulf 
separating them from laymen was widened by the fact that to 
them was committed the guardianship of the doctrines of the 
church; for laymen were not expected or permitted to discuss 
or pass judgment on the creed or practices of the church, but 
such matters were left wholly to the clergy. 

The church, however, undertook to control the whole prog- 
ress of civilization. Its statements were to be accepted merely 
on its authority. It declared its system to be final. Great 
as its ideals were, its system permitted no growth except along 
its prescribed lines. And these lines were too limited to satisfy 
the human mind. Consequently, during the Middle Age there 
were many rebellions against the finalities and limitations of 
the ecclesiastical system. Numerous sects arose, but were 
stamped out as heretical. From the twelfth century on the 
popes were more and more engaged in fighting heresies. So 
compact was the ecclesiastical system that no thorough-going 
reform was possible. Nevertheless there arose many "reform- 
ers before the Reformation," chief of whom were Wyclif and 
Huss. Although they all failed to break through, the Modern 
Period begins with Luther's successful revolt against the au- 
thority of the church and the finality of its system. 

The church was responsible for an immense literary activity 
throughout the whole Middle Age. In one edition (edited by 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 461 

Migne) there have been published 165 large volumes of ecclesi- 
astical writings in Greek and 217 volumes in Latin. All of 
these were written before 12 16. In addition to these works 
there were many others, a good part of which has never been 
pubHshed; some of them have been lost. They were mostly 
theological and controversial; some dealt with history and 
biography, especially with the lives of the saints. There was 
a large body of hymns, some of which are still sung (in transla- 
tion) even in Protestant churches. 

Out of practical needs there grew in the thirteenth century 
two great movements which deeply influenced each other and 
at the same time enriched the life of the period. These move- 
ments were embodied in the Franciscan and Do- 

Fr3.D.ciscd.iis 

minican orders, also called the mendicant or begging 
orders, because they lived by begging. It is difficult for us to 
imagine the wretched lot of those who fell ill during the Middle 
Age. Physicians were ignorant and inefficient, and of nurses 
and hospitals there were almost none. To this we must add 
the unsanitary condition of the houses and their total lack of 
comforts. From the point of view of the sick we can hardly 
overestimate the beneficent work of the Franciscans. That 
order was founded for the purpose of putting into practice 
the conception which St. Francis had of the imitation of 
Christ. 

The idea of the imitation of Christ has always been in the 
church, but, beginning with the twelfth century, it may be said 
to have been for a while one of the dominant ideas of Christen- 
dom. This may have been due to the fact that during the 
eleventh and twelfth centuries, because of the crusades, the 
attention of Europe was fixed as never before on the places 
where Christ's life had been spent. The idea found its classic 
literary expression a little later in the book entitled the Imita- 
tion of Christ, attributed to Thomas a Kempis (1380-147 1), 
and its classic exemplification in the life of St. Francis of Assisi 
(1181-1222), the founder of the Franciscan order. 

Francis of Assisi was a gay spendthrift until his twentieth 
year, when, in consequence of a dangerous illness, he became a 



462 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

serious, devout man. His one thought was to imitate Christ 
and his apostles in their poverty, in preaching, and in their ser- 
^ _ . vice to others. Like Jesus, St. Francis wished only 

St. Francis. ,, , , . *' , ,, ^-r i ^ ^ - , 

to go about domg good. He devoted himself 
0-, 63-65'. ^^° fi^st to the most disagreeable work he could find, 
R-, 154-156. the care of lepers. He conquered the repug- 
nance which he felt at their sight and contact, and 
thereafter his path was plain. His burning zeal soon won 
imitators and followers, and the idea of establishing an order 
took possession of him. In this he believed that he was in- 
spired by God, for he says: "And afterward the Lord gave me 
brothers, and no one showed me what I ought to do, but the 
Lord himself revealed to me that I ought to live according to 
the holy gospel, and I caused it to be written in a few simple 
words, and the pope confirmed the rule." "The form of the 
holy gospel," according to St. Francis, was poverty and service. 
He provided that his "brothers" should spend their 
ciscans^^ livcs on the highway, preaching and ministering to 
others whenever and wherever occasion offered; 
they should work for their bread if work could be found; if 
not, they might beg it; but they should never receive money 
under any circumstances, nor more food than was necessary 
for their wants for the day; all kinds of property or possession 
were forbidden; and, like Christ, they should not have even 
where to lay their heads. Our practical common 
Impossible, sense tells us that such an ideal was impossible and 
s B 271-27^ unreasonable, but never before was an impossible 
and unreasonable ideal made so plausible and 
attractive as this one was by the sweet charm and gracious ex- 
ample of St. Francis. But, as the number of his "brothers" 
increased, the impossibility of his ideal became apparent. 
So large a body of men could not exist without some kind of 
home. In spite of the prohibition of St. Francis, the order be- 
gan to accept the gifts of property which were offered them. 
Within a few years after his death the order was immensely 
wealthy, possessing a large number of rich monastic establish- 
ments. The rule of poverty, however, was observed tech- 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 463 

nically, for although the order became rich no member pos- 
sessed anything. 

The order of the preaching brothers, or Dominicans, was 
founded by St. Dominic, a Spaniard (11 70-1 221), for the ex- 
press purpose of combating the heresies which were then ap- 
pearing with alarming frequency in many parts of 
cans. Europe. He provided that its members should be 

s B 116-118 thoroughly trained in the doctrines of the church 
and fitted to instruct the people in them. In im- 
itation of St. Francis he introduced the rule of poverty into his 
order and the Franciscans imitated the Dominicans in the educa- 
tion of their members for the purpose of teaching and preaching. 
While influencing each other, there was an intense rivalry be- 
tween them. Both orders grew rapidly rich and powerful and 
spread to all parts of Christendom. Their popularity was great 
and they completely overshadowed all other orders in the thir- 
teenth and fourteenth centsuries. In the practical work of car- 
ing for the sick, in their high ideals of neighborly helpfulness, in 
preaching, in teaching, in learning, in building, and especially 
in the inspiring influence of the charming personality of St. 
Francis himself, these two orders contributed heavily to the 
civilizing influences of the thirteenth century. 

If we should judge of the civilization of the Middle Age by 

the degree of order and safety maintained, and by the difficulty 

and delays with which justice was administered, we should be 

p fG d co^P^ll^d to put a very low estimate on it. The 

people, and especially the nobles, had little regard 

, 240, 241. ^^^ ^^^ ^^^ order, and the government was unable 

to maintain peace and secure safety for the inhabitants. One 
of the worst features of the Middle Age was the prevalence of 
private warfare, for the nobles insisted on their right to fight 
out their own quarrels without appeal to law. Continuous 
warfare meant not only violence and oppression of the weaker 
members of society; it also hindered any advance in civiliza- 
tion for the whole society. Here, too, help came from the 
church, for she took the first steps to relieve this wretched con- 
dition. The first attempts took the form of the ''peace of 



464 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

God," proclaimed by a meeting of all the clergy of a province. 
Such proclamations, several of which appeared toward the end 
of the tenth century, forbade all violence and warfare, on the 
ground that they were contrary to the Christian spirit. 

The peace of God, however, did not attain much success, 
because the turbulent nobles could not be made entirely to give 
up fighting. Then the church attempted at least to mitigate 
these evils by means of the "truce of God," in 
which all fighting was prohibited on certain days 
s B ' 245-250 ^^^ ^^ certain periods. The truce was to last from 
vespers, or sunset, on Wednesday evening to sun- 
rise on the following Monday morning, and was also to be ob- 
served on holy days. The church regarded the keeping of 
the peace as a religious rather than a political duty. The only 
means which she had for enforcing the truce were ecclesiastical 
penalties, such as penance, excommunication, and anathema. 
In addition to supporting the truce, kings came to regard 
themselves as the guardians of the peace of the land, and at- 
tempted to secure peace and order by police regulations, en- 
forcing them with severe punishments on offenders. But, in 
spite of the efforts of the church and kings, there was through- 
out the Middle Age much lawlessness and violence. 

In the organization as well as in the administration of justice 

governments were very weak. There was no system of courts, 

one rising above another from the lowest to the highest court 

, of appeals, nor were the courts in any way co-ord- 

Ecclesiastical a i. ^ ^ y 

Courts. inated. Merely to mention the most important 

C/. S.B., 231 ones, there were ecclesiastical courts, in which all 
and Intro- ecclesiastical cases were heard and which, by an 

auction , , ' -^ 

easy and gradual usurpation of authority, came to 
hear many cases that involved only secular matters. And, in 
accordance with the high claims of the papacy, the pope re- 
garded himself as the highest judge on earth and openly in- 
vited the people of all nations to appeal to him. Toward the 
end of the Middle Age, however, kings generally forbade their 
subjects to appeal to the pope, and this was a frequent cause 
for a quarrel. 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 465 

There were manorial courts, held generally not by the land- 
lords in person but by their agents. Each manor, 
Courts!^ or village, had its own court, which heard and ad- 
judicated the every-day affairs of the villagers and 
their relations to their landlord. 

Then there were feudal, or baronial, courts, in 

Courts* which every lord undertook to administer justice 

to his vassals according to feudal custom. 

Finally, there was in each country the royal court, with the 

king at its head, but presided over by his judges, which he 

strove to make superior to all other courts. By all possible 

means he tried to increase the number of ''royal" 

Royal Courts. . - , . 

cases, that is, cases that must from their nature 
come before his court. The most successful examples of this 
poHcy are furnished by the kings of England and France, who, 
by their travelling judges and other means, carried the "king's" 
justice to all parts of their realms. 

We must note also that in the Middle Age there was not 
much lawmaking, as we understand the term, because the com- 
mon conception was that custom was law. Thus when Fred- 
erick Barbarossa refused to hold the pope's stirrup 
isSw? ^^ declared that he was not bound to do so because 

it had not been the custom for the king of Germany 
to perform such an act, and he yielded only when he learned 
that one of his predecessors had rendered the pope that service. 
The work of every court, therefore, was to determine what 
had been the custom. This the court did generally by asking 
the oldest men in the community what the practice in regard 
to any particular matter had been, and their testimony, when 
once established, was final. 

When the regular rules of evidence were not sufficient, the 
court appealed to the ordeal, or judgment of God. It might 
Ordeals ^^ ^^^*^ either to determine which of two persons 

was in the wrong or to test the guilt of an accused 
., 234 239. pgj.gQj^^ r^Yie commonest forms of the ordeal were 
the ordeal of the cross, in which the two persons stood with 
outstretched arms in the form of a cross, and the one whose 



466 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

arms fell first lost his case; the ordeal by hot water, and the 
ordeal by hot iron, in which the accused either thrust his hand 
into boiling water, or carried a piece of hot iron in his hands a 
certain distance, or walked over pieces of hot iron; if after a 
certain time he showed no traces of having been burned, he 
was declared innocent; the ordeal by the suspended bread or 
psalter, in which the suspended object was expected to turn 
in one direction if the accused were guilty and in the opposite 
direction if he were innocent; the ordeal of the sacrament, in 
which the accused took the eucharist, the expectation being 
that if he were guilty the consequences would be fatal. The 
judicial combat, or the ordeal by arms, though opposed by the 
church, was in common practice among the nobility. 

During the Middle Age the common people, burdened with 
the struggle for existence, had neither the time nor the means 
to acquire culture, and the nobles, delighting in war and sports, 

sought their culture chiefly in the practice of arms. 
SchoSs^nthe It is not Strange, therefore, that during a large part 
vST^^ ^^' ^^ ^^^ period learning was to be found only among 

the clergy. In the first centuries of our era the 
larger towns in the Roman empire had municipal schools, the 
teachers in which were paid by the town. There were at the 
same time, no doubt, other teachers who conducted private 
schools. With the invasion of the Germans these municipal 
schools disappeared, and public instruction would have perished 
entirely had not the church assumed the task of instructing 
the people. The church was already engaged in giving religious 
instruction, having created in this way a kind of religious school 
system, in which the churches were the schoolhouses, the 
priests the teachers, and the children and even the adults of the 

parish the pupils. The priest instructed his parish- 
by^thePriest. io^icrs in the principal doctrines of the church, in 

the Lord's prayer, the ten commandments, and in 
some form of the creed. All committed these to memory and 
some of them also learned to read. Probably every parish 
priest conducted a catechetical school of this sort in his parish. 
The church then adapted herself with rare skill to the new 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 467 

needs of the people, and enlarged the field of her activities, 
making use of her primitive educational machinery to instruct 
Th Church ^^^ people in secular branches as well as in reli- 
and Educa- gion. She established schools in connection with 

cathedral churches and in monasteries, and from 
the sixth to the twelfth century these were the only educational 
institutions. 

The cathedral schools owed their existence to the good 
sense and insight of the bishops, who were accustomed to 
educate their own clergy. Although many bishops began such 

schools of their own accord and on their own 
Schools. authority, the church soon assumed control of them, 

R 106 ^^^ various councils passed suitable laws and 

regulations concerning them. Every bishop was 
expected to have such a school in connection with his cathedral 
and to see that it was supplied with a "master" fitted to teach 
his pupils as well as to train them in good morals. The work 
in such schools was quite elementary, consisting of the reading 
of the Bible and some of the works of the church fathers, the 
study of the simplest Christian doctrines, the creed, the Lord's 
prayer, and music, especially singing. The teacher was ex- 
pected to train up a good choir for the cathedral, for singing 
was an important part of the church services. 

From the beginning of monasticism in the west a certain 
emphasis had been laid on study, since without some education 
the monks could not read the Bible and the religious books 

which formed a part of their devotions. The rule 
sJhSS^ ^^ St. Benedict took this into account, and the 

practical needs of the monastery caused the monks 
to lay more and more stress on learning. In the monastic 
schools instruction was given to the monks, to the children who, 
having been devoted to the monastic life, lived in the monastery, 
and to all laymen who desired it. At first, instruction was 
free to all, but a present was expected from the laymen, and 
eventually demanded of them as a fee. The instruction in the 
monasteries was a little broader than in the cathedral schools, 
arithmetic being added and, in the larger monasteries, gram- 



468 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

mar, or Latin literature, and theology. The method of instruc- 
tion was by lecture, discussion, question and answer, and the 
composition of letters, poems, and the like. But the 
' ' incalculable service which the monks rendered to 
Copied^"^*^ the cause of education was the copying and pre- 
serving of books. The need of books for their de- 
votions as well as for their studies led the monks to expend 
a great deal of energy on this work. There was generally a 
room {scriptorium) in the monastery reserved for the copyists. 
Sometimes one monk read aloud the text which he was copying 
and other monks also wrote the words as he pronounced them. 
Thus several copies of the same work were produced at the same 
time. Generally, however, only one copyist was occupied in 
copying a manuscript. The copyists were instructed to take 
the greatest pains to copy word for word, but in spite of their 
efforts many errors crept into their work. Some abbots spared 
neither pains nor expense to secure manuscripts for their 
libraries, which were often the object of their deepest pride. 
We are also indebted to the intellectual movement 

Chronicles. . . « , , r i i- i 

m the monasteries for a large number of the mediaeval 
chronicles. One of the monks in each monastery was charged 
with the task of committing to writing all the important events 
and news of the day. Since the monasteries served as hotels, 
keeping a number of rooms for the accommodation of travellers, 
the chronicler of a monastery had exceptional opportunities for 
learning what was going on in the world. From guests as well 
as from local sources he was able to obtain materials for his 
narrative. 

The fact that the church undertook to give instruction in 
common-school branches as well as in religion is of immense im- 
portance in the history of civilization; for it had the effect of 
preserving from the general ruin a certain amount of the learn- 
ing and science which had flourished in the Roman empire and 
which might otherwise have been lost to humanity. Its im- 
portance justifies our studying the process in some detail. 

The practical motive which impelled the church to this 
undertaking was the continued need of an educated and trained 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 469 

clergy. The church of the late Roman empire was a very 
elaborate structure. During its development from the simple 
Need of an Congregations of the apostolic time it had grown 
Educated up in the midst of a highly civilized society; as 

it widened its scope and took in larger and larger 
numbers from all ranks and classes, it inevitably absorbed more 
and more of the culture of the age. In the matter of creed and 
doctrines, for example, the church fathers found it necessary 
to explain the meaning of difficult ideas, or to defend the faith 
against the sneers and attacks of pagan critics, or to determine 
the correct and orthodox view in questions that were open to 
dispute. In this work they had, of course, to use the existing 
material for argument and exposition; that is, the logical 
methods and the metaphysical ideas of Greek philosophy. The 
form of service was elaborated and enriched from the art and 
literature of the time. The government of the church became 
more complicated, and the Roman law and Roman government 
were drawn upon for this purpose. 

It is evident that the officiating clergy of such a church would 
have to possess at least the general elements of the prevailing 
system of education; the simple evangelist of the apostolic 
type would no longer suffice. This minimum of education the 
clergy would acquire in the natural process of going to the 
Roman pubHc schools, while the higher learning and training 
which would fit for leadership and commanding position in the 
church would be secured in the special schools maintained by 
the church in some of the great cities, and in the higher schools 
of rhetoric or philosophy which flourished in the empire. 

The collapse of the Roman empire in the west in the fifth 
century and the ruin of Roman culture presented a very serious 
problem to the church. It became more and more difficult to 

recruit an educated clergy after the public schools 
Church^ ° ceased. Under these conditions leading churchmen 
System Undertook to develop a system of church education 

which would include the necessary secular studies 
no longer obtainable in the public schools. Previous to that 
time the attitude of the church toward pagan culture had been 



470 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

largely hostile, although it had in fact taken up a good deal of 
that culture. St. Augustine, the greatest of the church fathers 
of the western church in this period, recognized the value not 
only of letters but also of history, rhetoric, and logic. 

The best example of the actual incorporation of secular 

branches in church instruction is given by the work of Cassio- 

dorus. This learned Roman had been the secretary of state 

. for the Ostrogothic king of Italy, Theodoric. 

Late in life he retired from the world and founded 
a monastery (540). For the training of the monks who lived 
there he collected a library of secular as well as religious books, 
and himself composed a manual of the elementary branches of 
learning, based on the text-books and manuals current at the 
Isidore time. In the early seventh century the learned 

of Seville. bishop of Seville, Isidore, composed a great encyclo- 
paedia intended to contain the elements of secular knowledge 
which would be of value to churchmen. 

When the churchmen of the seventh and eighth centuries 
undertook to compile text-books and collect manuscripts for 
the monastery schools, they had recourse, of course, to the 

material which had been used in the Roman public 
Lib^eralArls." schools. This general education had already been 

reduced to order and system in the "seven liberal 
arts," namely: the literary studies (the trivium) — grammar, 
rhetoric, and dialectic, or logic; the mathematical studies (the 
quadrivium) — arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music. 
This was derived by the Romans from the elementary studies 

earlier developed among the Greeks. The amount 
Tex""books! ^^ knowledge contained in the Roman text-books 

and manuals of the fourth century was not very 
great; it was easily supplemented by the larger text-books on 
particular studies and by the great classical works, such as 
those of Vergil, Cicero, and others, which were still read in the 
late Roman empire. Moreover, the studies of the public schools 
were regarded by the Romans as merely preparatory, either for 
practical life, or for advanced studies in higher schools. This 
larger background, however, tended to disappear from knowl- 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 471 

edge in the general decline -of culture, and the church schools 
were left with little beyond the elementary texts and manuals 
which the churchmen had collected or had used in writing 
texts of their own. Since the churchmen were interested in 
preserving the elements of education for a practical purpose, and 
still regarded pagan culture as a thing to be guarded against, 
they neglected the larger works and the finer products of the 
classical intellectual development. 

On one side, the Roman system itself was very meagre. In 
adapting Greek learning to the Latin world, the Romans had 
paid less attention to the abstract than to the practical side of 
education. They took over a very little of the theoretical 
part, of logic or arithmetic or geometry or astronomy; any one 
especially interested in those matters could go to the famous 
schools of Athens or Alexandria in the east. Hence, when the 
churchmen adapted the Latin text-books to their own use, they 
transmitted only this meagre amount of mathematical and logi- 
cal material. 

The small and dwindling stream of learning was precariously 
preserved in certain monastery schools during the Dark Ages, 
especially in Italy and England; elsewhere in western Europe 
the ignorance was scarcely relieved. Hence, when 
^gj[|^^^^f^^'^ Charlemagne sought to raise the clergy of his em- 
Monastery pire to a higher level in order to use them as a 

Schools. ... 

Civilizing force, he sought out learned men from the 
10, 11/12^' f^w corners where learning survived: he brought to 

his court Alcuin (of York, in Northumbria), and 
Peter of Pisa, and Paul the Lombard from Italy. Alcuin was 
intrusted especially with the work of organizing the monastery 

schools of the empire; the monastery of Tours, of 

which he became abbot, was a sort of training-school 
for teachers, who then went to establish schools in other mon- 
asteries. The amount of learning which Alcuin and his con- 
temporaries were able to communicate was very slight, because 
of the disappearance of so much that had been familiar to the 
educated world of the fourth century. Nevertheless, it pre- 
sented the outlines of a general system of common-school educa- 



472 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

tion in the seven liberal arts, and these outlines were constantly 
being filled out in the later centuries. 

The intellectual revival of the age of Charlemagne may be 
regarded as a second beginning of the system of church schools. 
From that point the amount of knowledge of Roman culture 
Progress in Constantly increased and the quality of instruction 
Monastic constantly improved, until the movement cul- 
during the minated in the great university period of the 
^^' thirteenth century. The general manner of the 
advance was the recovery of larger and finer works that had 
been forgotten but not destroyed. The Latin authorities and 
authors known to Alcuin in the eighth century merely as names 
were constantly being rediscovered in the tenth and eleventh 
centuries; copies were made and exchanged among the mon- 
asteries, and text-books were enlarged and improved. 

The mathematical studies were especially enriched by the 
rediscovery of their originals. We have already noticed that 
the more abstract side of these studies was not available in Latin 
Mathematical works and had therefore not been carried over into 
Sciences the church system of learning. They were brought 

among the ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 11, 

Mohamme- to the knowledge of the monastery schools by a 
curious and roundabout route. The Moham- 
medans had spread over the Greek world of the eastern Medi- 
terranean and had occupied such centres of Greek culture as 
Alexandria in Egypt. They had taken into their Arabian cul- 
ture a good deal more of Greek mathematics and science and 
philosophy than had been transmitted to the Latin schools of 
the west. The Moors in Spain had participated in this de- 
velopment, and the Spanish universities of Cordova and Seville 
were far in advance of the schools of Christian Europe. In the 
twelfth century monkish scholars from England, France, and 
Germany went to Spain to study and brought back translations 
of Greek works on mathematics and philosophy with their 
Arabian commentaries. 

What we have made out here will show the mistake of be- 
lieving that there was no intellectual progress within the limits 
of the Middle Age. On the contrary, from the ninth century 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 473 

on, every generation saw an increase in the amount of knowl- 
edge and an improvement in the instruments for imparting it. 
Meagre ^ measure of this advance can be gained by corn- 

Amount of paring the monastic learninsf of the age of Charle- 

Learning in ^ " . ^ ° 

the Ninth magne with that of the twelfth century. The educa- 
en ury. ^.^^ available in the schools founded by Alcuin and 
his co-workers in the empire of Charlemagne was very meagre. 
It was based mainly on the slight manuals and summaries which 
had been compiled by the church fathers of the sixth, seventh, 
and eighth centuries. To be sure, there were some copies of 
older and better works, but these were few and apparently the 
teachers of the ninth century were not competent to use them. 
Grammar, rhetoric, and logic were confined to the learning of 
formal rules and definitions; the larger technical works familiar 
to Roman scholars of the fourth century were not studied, and 
little use was made of the models of language, style, and ideas 
to be found in the masterpieces of Roman literature. Arith- 
metic included little more than the simple operations of com- 
puting, rendered more difficult by the clumsy Roman numerals. 
It embraced also the study of the mystic properties of num- 
bers.* Geometry was largely composed of simple rules for land 
measurement and descriptions of the different parts of the 
world, or what we should call geography. Astronomy meant 
the study of the seasons, the phases of the moon, for the reckon- 
ing of the date of Easter, the names of the stars, and astrology 
(the notions about the influence of the stars on human fortunes). 
The monastery schools of the ninth century, therefore, sup- 
. , , plied a very thin diet of learning to its scholars, a 

Advance by -^ ^ -' '^ ' 

the Twelfth curious compound made up of the elements of Roman 

^^ ^^^' studies, of misunderstood conceptions of higher 

knowledge, and of absurd and superstitious notions. By 

the end of the twelfth century the content of the studies was 

*The mystic properties of numbers seem to us imaginary. Thus, 
six was regarded as the only perfect number because it equals the sum 
of all its divisors, and because it was a perfect number God created the 
world in six days. Three was supposed to have a mystic property be- 
cause it is the only number whose square is greater than the cube of the 
number next below it. , 



474 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

immensely increased and improved. The literary studies of 
grammar and rhetoric included the larger technical grammars, 

the rhetorical works of learned Romans like Cicero 
StudSZ ^^^ Quintilian, and the study of Roman literature 

from the classical writings of Vergil and other 
Roman authors. Logic was based on a knowledge of the com- 
plete logical works of Aristotle and of many Greek and Ara- 
bian commentaries, made available in Latin translations. 

The mathematical studies were especially enriched. In 
arithmetic, the monastery schools had acquired from the 
Mohammedans the use of the so-called Arabic (really Hindu) 

numerals, including the zero, by means of which 
Studies"^ ^^^ quantity could be indicated by the position of the 

digits. It also included the use of letters or sym- 
bols, that is, elementary algebra. The works of the Greek 
mathematician Euclid of Alexandria were secured also from 
Arabian translations current in Mohammedan Spain, and made 
possible a very fair course in plane geometry. Similarly for 
astronomy, the standard work of Greek learning in this science, 
the astronomy of Ptolemy, became familiar to the schools in 
the west in the twelfth century. 

The result of all this advance was that the "seven liberal 
arts" could be pursued as higher studies. This was true, of 
course, mainly of the larger schools in favored situations, and 

especially of the cathedral or bishops' schools, 
of Arts "^hi* ^ which were usually located in the larger cities. 
tiS ^^^^^'^^^' There large libraries were collected and the means 

developed for higher instruction. All this was 
preparatory to the emergence of the universities, which grew 
out of cathedral rather than monastery schools, and in which 
an essential division was the "faculty of arts," the enlarged 
curriculum the evolution of which we have been tracing. This 
advance in learning may be regarded as the real origin of the 
universities. The advance was not confined to the general 
course in "arts"; technical studies like theology, law, and 
medicine developed in the same way to the point where they 
could be pursued as advanced subjects. The greater universi- 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 475 

ties regularly included "faculties" of arts, medicine, law, and 
theology. 

In the intellectual system of the Middle Age the highest ^ 
study was theology, which in fact included philosophy also. 
The greatest intellectual achievement of the mediaeval scholars 
TheoloKv ^^^ ^^ thirteenth-century synthesis of the existing 
Including doctrines of the church and the existing ideas of 
philosophy and science and logic. This combina- 
tion was in the form of a systematic theology, reconciling faith 
and reason, in which faith was represented by the teachings of 
the church resting on divine authority, and reason was repre- 
sented by the philosophical system of Aristotle, enjoying an 
almost equal reverence of the theologians. 

The logical and metaphysical element in mediaeval theology 
had been introduced in three stages, (i) The lowest and 
deepest stratum was that amount of Greek philosophy which 
had been imported into the Christian doctrines in 
velopment of the period of their formulation, down to about 400. 
Philosophy. Controversies had arisen in the early church over 
(i) In the the difficulties and mysteries of the faith, in which 

Early Forma- , , . , _ . . , . 

tion of Chris- both parties to the conflict took the weapons 01 
tiines.°^ argument at hand in the learning of the age. The 

incarnation, the Trinity, the relation of the Son to 
the Father, and similar questions, were settled by using the 
conceptions of Greek philosophy, and these conceptions were 

embodied in the creed and doctrines. (2) The 
Dark Ages, early Middle Age had little knowledge of the 

philosophy upon which this original work rested, 
but it possessed, in the elementary treatises on logic which 
were studied in the monastery schools, some hints of the 
problems which Greek schools of philosophy had handled. 
An occasional scholar of the tenth or eleventh century made 
( ) In the Re- l^^sitating attempts to apply logical methods and 
vival of philosophical conceptions to religious questions, but 

with very inadequate material and with modest 
results. (3) The twelfth century saw the introduction of the 
complete works of Aristotle to the knowledge of the church 



476 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

schoolmen. This system of thinking, so completely organized, 
so comprehensive in its reach, so carefully grounded in logic 
and reason, made a tremendous impression on them. At first 
regarded by the church authorities with suspicion, because of 
its complete reliance on human reason and its complete ignor- 
ing of faith, it was eventually adopted by theologians and 
made the basis of a new and more systematic formulation of 
Catholic doctrine. 

This evolution can be illustrated by noticing the prevailing 
tendencies in theology in successive periods. In the early 
Middle Age, to the eleventh century, theology was little more 
Eleventh- than the learning of what had been handed down by 
Century In- ^j^g early church fathers. In the eleventh century 

terest in Logic "^ . , •' 

and Phil- there arose a philosophical controversy over the 
°^°^ ^ question of the "universals" (whether the general 

ideas or concepts were real things, or whether reality inhered 
only in the particular objects or forms).* This problem, which 
was at the root of the conflict between the ancient Greek schools 
of Plato and Aristotle, was found in the text-books on logic which 
the churchmen studied in the schools. In that century the 
learned Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, attempted to dem- 
onstrate the existence of God, the nature of Christ, and other 
fundamental propositions of the faith, by logic and reason, 
using what knowledge was then available of Greek philosophy. 

* Those who held that general or abstract terms corresponded to 
realities having real existence, were known as "realists"; those who, 
on the contrary, held that reality was to be found only in individual 
things and that general or abstract terms were merely names, were 
known as "nominalists." 

Roscelin, canon of the cathedral of Compiegne, about 1090, expounded 
the nominalist doctrine. He taught that genera, species, qualities 
were abstractions and not realities. He based his argument on the 
appeal to the senses. Who ever saw "humanity," or "wisdom," or 
"color"? Individual human beings are real things, but humanity 
as such has no independent existence. Color or wisdom does not exist 
by itself; on the other hand, a wise man or a colored object has real 
existence. 

Obviously this teaching was sceptical and materialistic in its ten- 
dency; Roscelin himself had been led by it to cast doubt on the reality 
of the Trinity as one God. The teaching was therefore combated 
by the leading churchmen and theologians of the time. The contem- 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 477 

Both the controversy over universals and the attempts of An- 
selm at constructing a systematic theology were seriously 
hampered by the incomplete knowledge and the mistaken in- 
terpretations which characterized the education of the time. 

In the early twelfth century a more complete knowledge 
of the logic of Aristotle led the great French scholar, Abelard, 
to criticise the accepted interpretations of theology and to 

submit the doctrines of the church to the test of 

reason. To the orthodox churchmen of the time 
fss^iSQ"^' ^^^ teachings seemed to be based entirely on human 

reason and logic, and to constitute a serious menace 
to faith. He was driven from one school to another, and 
finally compelled, under threat of excommunication, to abandon 
his teaching and to retract his opinions. 

The real value of Aristotle for the formulation and system- 
atizing of theology w^as too great to permit his works to be 
neglected. The way of reconciling faith and reason. Christian 

doctrine and Greek philosophy, was found by the 
Theoiogy^of theologians of the thirteenth century. Accepting 
Centiuy ^^^^^^ ^^^ whole body of faith as final and authoritative 

and beyond question, because they were divinely 
revealed, these schoolmen used the logic and metaphysics of 
Aristotle to demonstrate that they were reasonable also. This 
work was done largely by members of the Dominican order, 

porary William of Champeaux, at the cathedral school of Paris, set 
forth the realist position. True reality belongs only to the genus or 
species: humanity (the human species) is a real thing; it is the sub- 
stance which manifests itself in the accidental (or individual) form of the 
man Socrates or the man Plato. Anselm, the learned archbishop of 
Canterbury, gives a similar explanation in his theological works. 
The attributes (abstract qualities) are true substances and are the ob- 
ject of rational knowledge; they have an existence anterior to and 
more real than the objects of sense (the individual things). Humanity, 
wisdom, color, therefore, are realities, universal substances. 

The realist doctrine was evidently the one more adapted to explain- 
ing the mysteries of the faith. It gave a metaphysical basis for com- 
prehending the mystery of the Trinity (one God in three persons), 
the Incarnation, transubstantiation (the change of the substance of the 
bread and wine into the substance of the body and blood of Christ, 
while the accidents of material and shape remained the same). 



478 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

which secured virtually a monopoly of the teaching of theol- 
ogy in the universities. The devotion of this order to the 

church made certain in advance that these studies 
DomiiScans. would not lead to a weakening of the faith, and so 

a way was found for a fairly complete and inde- 
pendent study of philosophy, although it was always oflS- 
cially subordinate to theology. 

The greatest example of this work was the systematic theology 
of St. Thomas Aquinas (Thomas of Aquino, in Italy). He was a 
Dominican friar who studied and later taught at the university 

of Paris and at other centres of learning shortly 
Aquinas. after the middle of the thirteenth century. He was 
R I IQ4 deeply versed in Aristotle, upon whose works he 

wrote several learned treatises. His great work, 
the Summa Theologies, well illustrates both the learning and the 
methods of the period. It was an attempt to construct a com- 
plete system of the doctrines and teachings and practices of the 
church, supported and demonstrated by the accepted prin- 
ciples of the logic and metaphysics of Aristotle and by all other 
sources of logic and reason available at the time. Beginning 
with the most fundamental problem (whether the existence of 
God is demonstrable or not) he proceeds step by step to ex- 
amine and prove every particular point in Catholic faith. 
The result was intended, and was generally accepted, as the in- 
controvertible demonstration of the truth of Christian doctrine 
by both divine and human authority, by both faith and reason. 
The method of demonstration was characteristic of the age 
in its trust in formal logical rules. At each point he begins by 
stating the problem and first giving the reasons for denying what 

he expects to prove. Then he poses the authorita- 
MeSiS^.^^ tive statement upon which the accepted belief 

rests, usually from the Scriptures or from one of the 
orthodox fathers. Then he gives the reasons for accepting the 
belief, very largely based on the principles of Aristotle's meta- 
physics, and finally refutes the objections to the belief which 
he had first stated. Such a demonstration has the appearance 
of considering both sides of the problem and reaching the con- 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 479 

elusion on the grounds of logic and reason; in fact, of course, the 
conclusion had been reached in advance in the mind of the 
writer, on grounds of faith and the authority of the church.* 

St. Thomas was only one (although the chief one) of a num- 
ber of philosophical theologians, mostly members of the Domini- 
can order. Their combined work in systematizing religious 
The "Scholas- belief constitutes what is usually known as the 
tic System." " scholastic system" or "scholasticism." Its main 
Its Char- features, as is apparent from what we have studied, 
were: (i) complete acceptance of the authority of 
the church in matters of belief and opinion; (2) reverence for 
Aristotle as the final authority in logic and reason, "the master 
of those who know," as the contemporary Dante calls him; and 
(3) a formal logical method of demonstration, which was more 
valuable for systematizing past knowledge than for acquiring 
new. 

Civil law was taught in many schools, sometimes as a part 
of grammar, sometimes as a part of rhetoric, but finally as an 
independent subject. The clergy and monks devoted them- 
selves to its study with great zeal and practised it 
with financial profit. For some time they were the 
chief, if not the only, lawyers in many parts. Medicine was 
very little studied in the schools, its study and practice being 
confined chiefly to the clergy and monks. It is known that 

* To illustrate this subtle method, we may summarize the argument 
in the section on the existence of God. First the question is posed: 
"Whether God exists or not." Then the reasons for denying the exist- 
ence of God: "It seems that God does not exist. For if one of two 
contradictions is infinite, the other is destroyed. But the name God 
means infinite good; therefore, if God exists there can be no evil. But 
there is evil; hence God does not exist." Then the authoritative word: 
"But against this is the word of God in Exodus 3 : 14; T am that I 
am.'" Then the reasons for believing that God exists, drawn from 
philosophical notions of the "prime mover," the "first cause," etc., 
with references to Aristotle. And finally the refutation of the argu- 
ment from the existence of evil, on the authority of Augustine; namely, 
that it belongs to the infinite goodness of God to permit evil to exist 
in order that He may bring good out of it. 

An excellent illustration of this method is the letter of Innocent III, 
in which he decides between the claimants of the imperial crown. 
The letter will be found in the Source Book, No. 130. 



48o EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

clergymen occasionally owed their advancement to high posi- 
tions in the church (bishoprics) to their reputation as practising 
physicians. Whatever medical knowledge they possessed was 
obtained from translations of medical works by Greek authors. 
During the twelfth century the monastery schools seem to 
have closed their doors to all except monks, and the cathedral 
schools then sprang into fame and began a development which 
Rise of resulted in the establishment of universities, which 

Universities, -^ere fostered by both the pope and secular rulers. 
S. B., 176. The name of a university in the Middle Age was 
■' ^^°' studium generate, meaning a place of study which 

received students from everywhere. Universitas meant simply 
the "whole," or "all," and was a common name for a guild. 
In the twelfth century there were only four universities exist- 
ing in Europe, namely, Paris, Oxford, Bologna (famous for its 
law) , and Salerno (for its medicine) . The university of Salerno 
seems to have had no influence on the development of univer- 
sities and the university movement. The other three, how- 
ever, served as models for the organization of other universities. 
^ , The university of Bologna is called a "student" uni- 

" Student" vcrsity, because its government and organization 
had their beginning in the guilds or associations of 
students. Bologna was the home of many professors, whose 
fame attracted students from all quarters. The professors were, 
however, merely private teachers, without organization, each 
one following his profession in an independent way. Many of 
the students at Bologna were foreigners, and, being without 
political rights there, they formed guilds for mutual protection 
and co-operation (a little before 1200). These student guilds 
elected a student as their head or rector to look after their in- 
terests. He made terms with the professors, hiring them and 
fixing the amount of their fees. The students proved to be 
rather hard masters and made stringent rules for the conduct of 
the professors. They fined a professor who failed to meet his 
class or who came late. No professor could leave the city with- 
out the consent of his pupils and of the rector; and, besides, he 
had to deposit a sum of money with the rector as a guarantee 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 481 

that he would return. The professor was at the mercy of the 
students, who found it easy to bring him to terms by boycotting 
him. In the same way the students were able to put great 
pressure on the tradesmen and landlords of the town. Of the 
city government the students demanded many favors, such as 
freedom from arrest and from taxation, and the right to be 
tried in a court of their own. They were generally able to se- 
cure what they demanded by threatening to secede and go to 
some other city. As the university had no buildings or prop- 
erty, but consisted merely of students and teachers, it could 
easily be removed from one place to another. 

O., 62. 

From the number and character of the students' 
songs that have come down to us we may form some idea of 
their gay, careless life. 

The university of Paris grew out of the cathedral school of 
Paris and had its beginning in a guild of masters. The chan- 
cellor of the cathedral, who had charge of the cathedral schools, 

was bound to grant a license to teach to all who 

University of Successfully passed the examination which he set 

ro essors. ^hem. All who were thus licensed were called 

2 ' ^°- masters. In the twelfth century the number of 

R , 191, 192. ^ _ •' 

these masters increased rapidly and they formed a 
guild (about 11 70) for mutual aid and protection, just as the 
students of Bologna had done. They put themselves under 
the protection of the pope and asked his aid. They often had 
quarrels with the people of the city, in which they were generally 
victorious. Their weapons were the boycott, strike, and seces- 
sion. More than once they withdrew from Paris and refused 
to return until their demands were granted. The bishop of 
Paris, through the chancellor of his cathedral, retained a large 
measure of control over the university. 
The university of Oxford furnishes us a sHghtly different 

type. It seems to have been founded by English 
Third Type, masters and students, who, about 1167, for some 

unknown reason, withdrew from the university of 
Paris. In general, it resembled the university of Paris, being 
a university of masters. But as Oxford was not a cathedral 



/ 



482 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

town, its university had a development somewhat different from 
that of the university of Paris. The university of Oxford was 
able to free itself from the control of the bishop, who lived at 
Lincoln, some distance away, and to acquire greater powers of 
self-government. In fact, it was not long before the government 
of the town was largely in the hands of the officials of the uni- 
versity. 

The educational movement grew, as may be seen from the 
fact that in the thirteenth century seventeen universities were 
founded, in the fourteenth twenty-one, and in the fifteenth 
Growth of the ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ thirty-five. These were all founded 
Educational on the model of one of the three universities which 

Movement. . . 

have just been described. Strikes and secessions on 
■' ^ the part of the professors or students were common, 

and often resulted in the establishment of a university in a neigh- 
boring town. The great increase in the number of masters, who 
wished to gain a livelihood by teaching, also had some influence, 
and occasionally a town, being ambitious to have a studium gen- 
erale, took the initiative and hired the professors of some univer- 
sity to come and establish a university among them. It 
was inevitable that in the interest of uniformity all masters 
should be required to have about the same attainments. Con- 
sequently, a standard curriculum, or course of study, was early 
established, certain subjects and a fixed number of years of 
residence being required before the candidate could obtain 
the license to teach (master's degree). The students then, 
losing sight of the broader aim of culture, unwisely confined 
themselves to the required subjects and neglected all branches 
which were not necessary for obtaining a degree. Under this 
scheme the study of the classics (Latin literature) declined, and 
education became sterile and stereotyped. This state of affairs 
lasted until the great educational reforms of the Renaissance, 
a prominent feature of which was the sympathetic study of the 
classics for their living beauty. 

Much of the education in the Middle Age was what we should 
to-day call practical, or vocational. That is, it was planned for 
the express purpose of fitting men for their life-work: to be 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 483 

clergymen, teachers, and secretaries. Many pursued the course 
of study in an uninterested way, content to acquire the small- 
est possible amount of learning that would permit 
Education. them to follow their profession. On the other 
s B 10 hand, ambition led some of them to apply them- 
selves with great zeal to their studies, in the hope 
that they might rise to the positions of highest honor open to 
them. There was, however, toward the end of the Middle Age 
an increasing number of men, who studied for the pleasure in 
acquiring knowledge, for the joy in knowing, and for the cul- 
ture which comes only from an acquaintance with the best 
things that have been said and done.* 

One of the most characteristic features of the culture of the 
Middle Age was the literature produced by feudal society. 
The best of it was in the form of narrative poems of the "ro- 
mantic" type, dealing with the adventures and 
LiterSure. deeds of heroes, and colored with all the picturesque 
life of the feudal age. Before we consider it, how- 
ever, we must first notice briefly the development of the na- 
tional languages in which it was written. The 

Popular Lan- . • i n^r* i n 

guagesofthe languages spoken m western Europe m the Middle 

^ ^ ^^' Age, as now, were mainly of two groups, Romance 

The Romance a,nd Germanic, or Teutonic. The Romance Ian- 
Languages. ' 

guages are those which developed out of the Latin 
spoken in the provinces of the Roman empire ; they are to be 
found, therefore, in that part of Europe in which the popula- 
tion, even after the Germanic invasions, was still largely com- 
posed of the descendants of Roman provincials. The Ger- 
manic languages were those developed out of the dialects spoken 
by the German tribes. They are to be found in central Europe, 
which is the ancient home of the Germans; in that part of the 
Rhine valley which was occupied in great number by the Ger- 
mans during the invasions; in the British isles, where the Angles 

* Education not only enabled one to make a living; It was also held 
in such high repute that it supplied all the defects of birth, and made its 
possessor, although of common birth, the equal, in the social scale, of 
the nobleman. Cf. S. B., 294, 295. 



484 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and Saxons became the ruling part of the population, and in the 
Scandinavian countries to the far north.* 

The Romance languages (French, Spanish, Italian, Portu- 
guese, Roumanian, and Romansch) developed out of ''spoken 
Latin,'* not out of the literary Latin which we study. We all 
Their Evolu- ^ecognize that there is a difference between the lan- 
tion from guage of every-day speech and the language which 

Spoken Latin. 1 • 1 1 ^ • • • rr^i i 

we read in books and use m writing. The latter 
is more conventional and fixed in its forms. In every-day 
speech there are popular tendencies which, if allowed to develop 
freely, would change the language in successive generations, 
and produce wider and wider differences in different parts of 
the country. There are tendencies to neglect the rules of gram- 
mar in talking, to pronounce words differently in different parts 
of the country, and to use words and phrases not generally 
found or tolerated in the written language. What prevents 
our own language from changing in this way more rapidly than 
it does, is a common and wide-spread knowledge of the standard 
and fixed form, due to public education and general reading. 
The same thing was true of the Latin spoken in the empire. 
There was a high level of culture among the upper classes, 
and even the uneducated heard correct Latin in public speeches, 
in the theatre, and in public proclamations. Moreover, the 
natural tendency to speak differently in different parts of the 
empire was checked by the strong bonds which held the whole 
empire together; the language used in Rome itself was known 
throughout the whole empire because Roman officials and sol- 
diers went everywhere, and because the one standard literary 
form was heard and read everywhere. 

Now, it was just the failure of these bonds and the decline 
of this culture which produced the several distinct Romance 
languages. The shock of the invasions was followed by three 

* Notice the "language frontier" established by the researches of 
recent scholars, as pictured on the accompanying map. It marks the 
limit of the actual occupation of Roman territory by the Germans west 
and south of the Rhine-Danube frontier. After the migrations the 
languages spoken south and west of that line were Latin, and those 
east and north were Germanic. 



Note to Map XXI. — The dotted line represents the modern frontier be- 
tween the Germanic and the Romance groups of languages. East and north 
of the line the people speak languages developed from the speech of the 
German tribes: Frisians, Franks, Saxons, Bavarians, Alemanni, etc.; south 
and west the people speak languages derived from the Latin speech of the 
Roman provincials. Flemish is spoken in northern Belgium; Dutch in 
Holland. The people of Germany use one standard literary language, but 
the popular speech is in two dialects. High German in the centre and south, 
Low German in the north. The ''Walloons" are the people of southern 
Belgium, who speak a dialect of French. Switzerland also is divided by 
the language frontier; the southwestern part speaks French (around the 
Lake of Geneva); the northeastern part (Berne, Zurich, Luzerne, etc.) speaks 
High German; a small strip on the south contains Italian-speaking people. 
In this southern part there are also a few small districts in which a Romance 
language distinct from Italian is spoken; this is known as Rhseto-Romanic, 
a name derived from the old Roman province of Rhastia, in this region. 

This is the language frontier of to-day; it corresponds pretty closely to 
that of the Middle Age. Note the advance south and west of the Germanic 
language, beyond the line of the Rhine and Danube, which must have been 
the language frontier in Roman times. This represents the limits of the 
actual germanizing of Roman lands by the invasions: the Germans who 
settled farther within the empire (such as the Western Franks, the Bur- 
gundians, the Lombards, etc.) were absorbed in the Roman population 
and their descendants speak Romance languages. 




\ -Milan "-^ 




4 Longitude 



East 8 from 



Greenwich 12 



L.L.P04US CO., S.Y. 



XXI 

LANGUAGE FRONTIER BETWEEN THE ROMANCE AND 
GERMANIC PEOPLES 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 485 

or four hundred years of violence and disorder. The Roman 
empire and its institutions fell to pieces; the schools ceased, the 
theatre and the forum fell into ruins. No longer confronted by 
a standard and conventionalized language, the popular speech 
developed its tendencies freely, changing in each generation 
farther and farther away from what had once been recognized as 
the correct Latin. Since the empire was no longer under one 
government, the speech of the different provinces tended to di- 
verge more and more widely. The result was the formation of 
the distinct Romance languages, differing widely from the 
literary Latin we read in classical works, and differing widely 
also from one another, although their relationship both to Latin 
and to one another is easily recognized. 

The Germanic languages developed out of the dialects spoken 
by the German tribes before the invasions; the history of the 
languages therefore is directly related to the history of the 

tribes. Some of them migrated and settled far 
Languages, within the empire, and were absorbed in the Roman 

population; their speech disappeared entirely, ex- 
cept as it may have influenced somewhat the character of the 
Romance dialects of the regions in which they settled. Such 
was the fate of the speech of the Burgundians, Lombards, Goths, 
and Vandals. The small tribes of Angles and Saxons became 
the ruling element of the population in the British isles, and 
their speech furnished the basis of the great national literary 
language, English. East Franks, Bavarians, Alamanni, and 
Saxons united to form a single nation, the Germans, and a single 
national language, German, developed among them. The 
northern part of the Netherlands became an independent 
state, Holland, and the local dialect spoken there developed 
into the literary language known as Dutch. 

The principal literary languages of the Middle Age were Old 

French, the language of northern France; Pro- 
LUerature. vengal, the language of southern France; ''Middle 

High German," the language of southern Germany 
in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; and English. There 
were also important works written in Spanish, Italian, and 



486 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

the Scandinavian tongues, but these lie rather to one side of the 
main current of feudal literature. In the first place, we should 
notice that the literature of the feudal age is a direct product 
of feudal society. This literature could not develop until feudal 
society had progressed far enough in organizing its resources 
and its life to demand and support a literature expressing its 
ideals and appealing to its sentiments and interests. The 
hearth of this literature was, therefore, the feudal castle, and 
especially the great castle which was the court of a great feudal 
prince. Here the feudal poet found an appreciative audience 
and found also encouragement and patronage. The literature 
had to be in the form of exciting stories which would interest the 
feudal audience. The poets found their materials in the legends 
and traditions that had come down to the feudal age from vari- 
ous sources in the past: old Germanic traditions and myths, 
legendary stories of Charlemagne and his age, Celtic traditions 
of the great hero Arthur and his companions, and romantic 
tales from the later Roman empire, dealing with the siege of 
Troy and the famous exploits of Alexander and Caesar. These 
stories they retold in the language of the feudal nobles whom 
they served, and in the spirit and manner of the feudal age, 
picturing Greek heroes, Charlemagne's followers, and Arthur's 
warriors, aU alike, as feudal knights of the twelfth or thirteenth 
century. 

The finest and most characteristic feudal literature is that in 
Old French. There are two distinct periods. The earlier 
poems, from the middle of the eleyenth to the middle of the 

twelfth century, reflect the manners of the earlier 
Old French rough feudal age; the later poems picture a society 

in which chivalry and courtesy had made a great 
d^Geste."^ advance. The earlier were called "chansons de 

geste," or "poems of heroic deeds." The poets 
Roland." took their themes from the traditions of the age 

of Charlemagne. Many of them deal with the 
defense of southern France against the Mohammedans in 
Spain; others are stories of brutal private war between feudal 
nobles. The most famous is the "Song of Roland" ("Chan- 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 487 

son de Roland")- It is a long narrative poem of some 4,000 
lines, and tells the familiar story of how Roland, a hero 
of Charlemagne's court, defended the rear-guard with 20,000 
knights, against hundreds of thousands of Mohammedans. 

In these poems the narrative consists, for the greater part, of 

the description of battles, told in the form of a series of single 

combats, with what would seem to us monotonous repetition 

of the same sort of incidents. They are brutal and 

d!i3,r3,ctcr 

bloody, but convey somehow an impression of 
grandeur. The ideals of the feudal knight as pictured in this 
literature are those of the rough and warlike period of feudalism : 
sheer physical strength and courage, pride and arrogance, 
fidelity of vassal and follower to his lord combined with a proud 
insistence on his own individual rights and dignity, and an un- 
questioning acceptance of the Christian faith, shown principally 
by a hatred of the infidel (the spirit of the first crusade). 
Women play almost no part in the stories; it is an age of fight- 
ers and heroes. 

The literature of the later period, after the middle of the 
tweKth century, differs very greatly from this earlier, cruder 
form, both in its subjects and in its spirit. Feudal society had 
made great advances in organization and in refine- 
cS/aky!^ ° ment. The great courts of feudal princes had be- 
come the centres of polite society; manners and 
tastes had improved, and greater stress was laid on social in- 
tercourse and on courtesy. These changes brought about a 
change in the literary taste of the nobles; they preferred to hear 
tales of love, of marvellous adventures, of tournaments and 
festivals.* The professional poets of course produced a poetry 
to meet the new demands; in this sense the literature of this 
period may be called "court poetry." The poets had to seek 
new subjects, since the type of hero treated in the Charlemagne 

* This change was partly due to the Influence of the south of France 
upon feudal society in the north. In the courts of Provence and 
Toulouse and Aquitaine a rich culture had developed earlier than in the 
north, and the ideals of chivalry and courtesy had been reflected in the 
local literature. This literature was in the form of short lyric love 
poems, composed by professional court poets known as "troubadours." 



488 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

stories had become fixed. They found this material in the 
fabulous stories of Arthur and his heroes. These stories had 
grown up among the Celts in Brittany and Wales, centring 
around the legendary figure of an ancient tribal hero, who, they 
imagined, had defeated the Saxons, conquered the Romans, 
and ruled over the world. From Brittany directly, or from 
Wales through the Norman-English poets, the poets of northern 
France became acquainted with this legendary material and 
used it for the framework of their romances of chivalry.* In 
these later French poems the ideals of the knight were those of 
a more refined age. The chief motives which actuated the 
heroes of these tales were love of a lady and desire for adventure 
and fame. The knight was still brave and strong, but his 
prowess was shown in tournaments and in adventures encoun- 
tered on the way, rather than in feudal warfare or fighting with 
the infidel. The stories are enlivened by descriptions of tourna- 
ments, of ceremonies such as knighting, of arms and armor, and 
of life in the castle, showing the more cultured, if less heroic, 
spirit of this age. 

One branch of the Arthur stories received an elaborate treat- 
ment in the thirteenth and later centuries because it appealed 
to religious sentiment as well as to a taste for tales of chivalry. 
Le ends of ^^^^ was the legend of the "Holy Grail," the cup 
the "Holy of the Last Supper which caught the blood that 
flowed from the side of Jesus on the cross. The 
crusading age had developed in western Europe an intense in- 
terest in the relics of the life of Jesus, and many old traditions 
coming from early Christianity had grown into marvellous 
legends, such as stories of the true cross, the crown of thorns, the 
lance that pierced the side of Jesus, and the Holy Grail. The 
Grail story was combined with a Celtic fairy-story of a marvel- 
lous vessel, first told by a French poet at the end of the twelfth 
century (the story of " Perceval '* by Christian of Troyes, about 

* These are the stories which the Englishman Mallory translated 
in the fifteenth century, and which Tennyson retold in his "Idylls of 
the King" — the stories of Lancelot and Guinevere, of Tristan and 
Isolde, of Geraint and Enid. 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 489 

1 1 80). The tale was taken, up and elaborated later by French 
and German poets, and became the centre of a whole group of 
romances, telling of a marvellous castle in which the Grail was 
guarded by an order of knights dedicated to that service, and 
of the adventures of Arthur's knights in trying to find it. 

The feudal literature of other lands we can only mention 
briefly. That of Germany began with translations of French 
romances, but it included also poems dealing with ancient tra- 
ditions. The most famous of these and the only one 
ature^in mS- ^^^^ ^^^ come down to US in a complete form is the 
GermS" "Song of the Nibelungs" (das ''Nibelungenhed"). 
It is the famous story of Siegfried and Brunhilda, 
enlied''^'^^ which Wagner took as the theme of his music 
dramas. The German court poets also produced a 
fine literature in the form of short lyrics, dealing mainly with 
love. This is known as the poetry of the Minne- 

Minnesingers. . ... 

singers, ''Minne being an old German word for 
love. It was inspired by the earlier lyric poetry of the trouba- 
dours of the south of France. In Spain, in Italy, and in Eng- 
land feudal poets were producing in this age a beautiful and 
abundant literature, not differing essentially, however, from 
that we have already described in the case of France. 

We cannot leave the subject of literature in native languages 
without noticing one very important form produced under the 
auspices of the church. The church in the Middle Age sought 
by every possible means to impress the people with 
Drama!^^ the ideas of the faith and with the history of Chris- 
tianity. One popular and successful method was 
found in the dramatizing of the incidents of the reHgious story. 
On great feast days, especially Christmas and Easter, the ser- 
vice was accompanied or followed by a representation of the 
incidents celebrated in the service. On Christmas, for example, 
the clergy would show the chorus of angels, the shepherds com- 
ing to the cradle of Jesus, the procession of the wise men of the 
east, and the group of Joseph and Mary with the child. On 
Easter they would show the empty tomb, and the women who 
came seeking the body of Jesus, and the angel who said: "He 



490 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

is not here, but is risen." These little scenes were really 
amplified parts of the service, and the words of the actors were 
taken from the service itself or from the Scriptures. In the 
later centuries, after 1200, they became very popular and soon 
outgrew the limitations of the church setting. At first they 
had been short scenes composed in Latin by the clergy; later 
they became long and elaborate plays, written in the native 
languages and composed by professional writers. They were 
presented in the public squares on stages specially built for the 
purpose, and they came to include a great many elements 
that were not religious but intended simply to amuse or interest 
the audiences. Thus they passed from the control of the 
church and became popular entertainments, but they still 
retained something of their religious character, in that the 
plots were still drawn from religious stories. The later plays 
were not restricted, however, to tales from the Bible, but drew 
very largely from the legendary lives of the saints, and from 
stories of miracles performed by relics and statues, and from 
other popular tales. 

The culture of a period may be estimated to a certain extent 
by its practice of the fine arts. It is important, therefore, to 
know something about the architecture, sculpture, and painting 
j> ^ of the Middle Age. You will recall that the Roman 

Architecture empire had been expanded so that it included the 
territory west of the Rhine and also what is now 
called England. Within that territory the Roman art of build- 
ing had flourished, and in the cities were to be found fine ex- 
amples of temples, amphitheatres, and other buildings that 
compared favorably with those in Italy and other parts of the 
empire. After the German invasions, however, the Roman 
art of building almost ceased for some centuries and even many 
of the buildings that had been erected fell into decay. Of 
course the people in those lands from the fifth to the tenth 
century must have built some sort of structures, but very few 
of them have survived, so that we have scant information 
about them. They probably made most of their buildings of 
wood. They did, however, erect some buildings in stone, and 




FACADE OF NOTRE-DAME-DE 
LA-GRANDE, AT POITIERS. 




FACADE OF SAINT-PIERRE, 
AT ANGOULEME. 




FACADE OF NOTRE-DAME-DU- 

PUY. 

Pholo Nenrdein. 



EXAMPLES OF ROM.ANESQUE ARCHITECTURE. 




CANTERBURY CATHEDRAL. 




Photo by Spooner 



LINCOLN CATHEDRAL. 
EXAMPLES OF GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE 




BAS-RELIEF r 
IN BAYEUX 
CATHEDRAL. 



NAVE OF THE 
CATHEDRAL 
OF 
CHARTRES. 




NATIVITY. 

Fragment of the destroyed rood-screen 
of the Cathedral of Chartres. 






KA 



#ll 



FLYING BUTTRESSES 
OF STE. GUDULE, 
BRUSSELS. 

(Reusens, Archeologie 
Chretienne.) 



TYPES OF VAULTS. 

I. Barrel vault. 2. Extrados of a groined vault. 
3. Intrados of a Roman groined vault. 4. Intra- 
dos of a groined vault with salient ribs. 

(Reusens, Archeologie Chretienne.) 




FRAGMENT OF STAINED GLASS OF NOTRE-DAME-DE-CHARTRES. 

The Annunciation — The Annunciation to the Shepherds — The Nativity. 

(Bibliotheque Nation- 
ale, Paris.) 



SIEGE OF JERICHO. 

History of the Jews, by 
Josephus. 

JEAN FOUQUET. 




( Bibliotheque Nation- 
ale, Paris.) 
Photo Berthand. 




ST. JUSTINA. 

MORETTO. 

(Museum, Vienna.) 




THE MARRIAGE AT CANA. 

Ms. Lat. gig. jacquemart de hesdin. 

(Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris.) 




PROPHET, CHURCH 
OF SOUILLAC. 






VIRGIN AND CHILD. FA- 
CADE OF THE CHURCH 
OF SAINTE-CROIX, AT 
LA CHARITE. 

Photo Mieusement. 



SAINT THEODORE, 
SOUTH PORCH OF 
THE CATHEDRAL 
OF CHARTRES. 




STATUE OF SAINT FOY AT 
CONQUES. 



VIRGIN AND CHILD. 

(Louvre, Paris.) 
Wood. 



EXAMPLES OF EARLY DECORATIVE CHURCH SCULPTURE. 




BUST OF NICCOLO DA UZZANO (?). 

DONATELLO. 

(Museum, Florence.) 




THE ANNUNCIATION. 

BENEDETTO DE MAJANO. 

(Church of Monte Oliveto, Naples.) 
Photo by Alinari. 




MADONNA WITH SAINTS. 

MINO DA FIESOLE. 

(Cathedral, Fiesole.) 



HEAD OF THE DAVID. 

MICHELANGELO. 

(Academy, Florence.) 



EXAMPLES OF RENAISSANCE SCULPTURE. 




o 

N 
N 

^^ 

<< 

K . 
Ho 

g^ 

O 




H 
U 

H 
>— I 

T" 

u 
< 

u 

I— I 

o 

CO 

< 

H 




THE LAST SUPPER. Leonardo da vinci. 
(Refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan.) From Raphael Morghen's engraving. 



EXAMPLES OF RENAISSANCE PAINTING. 



i. 

1 


1^^ 


J«^| 


j 


^^ 


Pl^2 



. §1 

< - « 

Q « O ■* 



< 
< 



Ph a. 



O 



f^TJ 




s 


^^^^■M 










. e^ 


^^^^■r t* 










ij — 


^^^B^^^W^Hkt 


a c 


^^K ^^^H^^l 


o <-> 


^^F a^H^I 


z .S 


tWH 


2> 


^H 


- C j 


J« 










u o 


^f^5 






^ "S 


m, ** 






. S 


^H 


C/3 . 


^p 


^ ^ 


^ 


i2 


M 


o 




■- 1 


'. 0- 


-^ 


' 7^ 




Pii 

H 

H 

ffiC/D 

H 
Pi 
S 
H 



CO 

W 

CO 

O 



W 

Pi 

H 

(X, 

u 

CO 

Q 
< 

I— I 
H 



u 
< 

CO 
I— I 

< 

o 

< 
w 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 491 

those which still exist show features of the Byzantine style, a 
name that is applied to the architecture of Constantinople and 
the eastern empire. We know that when Charlemagne wished 
to build his church at Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) he had a 
number of pillars brought for it from Ravenna, in Italy, and 
his architect adopted the plan of one of the churches of 
Ravenna.* Now, Ravenna had been for many years the resi- 
dence of ! the Greek governor of Italy and its churches were 
Byzantine in style. 

Early in the eleventh century, however, there began in the 
west a new period of building. Raoul Glaber, a Burgundian 
monk, who died in 1050, wrote in his chronicle: "It was as if 
, the world, throwing off its old garments, desired to 
Archftecture. Tcclothe itself in the white robes of the church. ... 
' The Christian nations seemed to rival one another in 
magnificence, in order to erect the most elegant churches. . . . 
All the religious buildings, cathedrals, country churches, and 
village chapels, were rebuilt and transformed into something 
better" shortly after the year 1000. He referred to the new 
style of architecture that had just made its appearance and is 
called Romanesque. From the illustrations between pages 490- 
491, we may easily determine the chief characteristics of the 
Romanesque style. It is characterized by the use of round 
arches, many of which are used merely in a decorative way to 
enliven what would otherwise be a big expanse of vacant wall. 
Horizontal lines are a prominent feature, by which the build- 
ings seem to rise by stories. The walls are comparatively thick. 
Consequently, Romanesque churches are inclined to be dark 
and gloomy. The churches seem low and depressed. Because^ 
of the apparent strength and majesty of the buildings, the gen- 
eral impression is one of heaviness. 

The walls were made thick and heavy in order to meet a 
change in the construction and material of the ceilings. In- 
stead of making the ceilings flat and of wood, as hitherto, archi- 
tects began to arch them and to construct them of stone. Thus 
the ceilings assumed the form of the ''barrel" vaulting which of 
course was known to the Romans. The great weight of the 



492 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

stones and the "thrust" (as the side, or outward, pressure is 
called), caused by the heavy arched ceiling, tended to make the 
walls spread apart. To resist this outward pressure, or thrust, 
the walls were made thick, and, at regular intervals, strength- 
ened by buttresses. 

The spread of the Romanesque style, which arose about the 
year looo, was due to the Benedictine monks, who were then 
closely bound together under the leadership of the monastery of 
Cluny. Hundreds of monasteries vied with one another in 
erecting magnificent churches, all in the Romanesque style. 
Most of the noted abbey churches of Europe are in this style. 

Early in the twelfth century there was developed a new style 
of architecture called Gothic. Architects learned that by using 
diagonal and transverse ribs following the lines of intersection 
of two Romanesque vaults, thus substituting the 
Architecture, g^oijied for the barrel vault, by the adjustments of 
the piers and thrusts of different arches operating 
in counterpoise, and by the use of the flying buttress, they could 
concentrate the outward pressure, or thrust, on certain points 
of the wall, leaving the rest of the wall comparatively free from 
the weight of the roof. It was therefore no longer necessary to 
make the whole wall so thick, reinforcement being required only 
at those points at which the weight of the roof was concentrated. 
At such points the walls were strengthened with buttresses. 
To transfer the thrust of the vaulting to the buttresses, which 
also they reinforced by weighting them with pinnacles, the 
architects invented the flying buttress. That is, from the top 
of the buttress they threw an arch, called a flying buttress, 
over to that point of the wall at which the weight of the ceiling 
was concentrated. Now, a flying buttress, owing to its arch 
structure, is very strong and thus capable of aiding in the sup- 
port of an immense weight. Consequently the architects were 
able to erect buildings more lofty than ever before. The ceil- 
ings of many of the Gothic churches reach a height of from 
one hundred to one hundred and seventy-five feet. 

The two great principles underlying Gothic were the substi- 
tution of the groined for the barrel vault and the balance of 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 493 

transmitted thrusts. The skeleton construction thus secured 
made possible the great windows and an abundance of light so 
characteristic of Gothic. Since the weight of the vaulting was 
concentrated at certain points of the wall, the intervening spaces 
could be used for windows without weakening it. Consequently, 
in place of the comparatively solid walls of the Romanesque 
churches, Gothic buildings have many windows. They are also 
richly decorated with pinnacles and beautiful tracery and many 
other forms cut in stone. Long perpendicular lines predominate, 
and, as compared with the Romanesque style, the general im- 
pression is one of loftiness and comparative lightness. 

It took a long time to build a great cathedral and it frequently 
happened that the work was interrupted for many years. When 
it was resumed it was generally necessary to employ another 
architect, and he often changed the style of the building to 
suit the taste and fashion of the time. So it is not uncommon to 
find a building, some parts of which are Romanesque, others 
in successive styles of Gothic, and still others of a later style. 

Gothic architecture,* which had its beginnings in the first 
quarter of the twelfth century, spread rapidly through France 
and England, where it became popular and displaced, to a great 

extent, the Romanesque style. It spread more 
Gothic. slowly to Germany, where the first Gothic buildings 

were erected in the thirteenth century. Once es- 
tablished, however, it held sway till deep into the sixteenth 
century, when it was slowly replaced by the art of the Renais- 
sance, an account of which will be given in the next chapter. 
The Gothic style was employed chiefly in the cities, many of 
which had then become large and rich. In a spirit of rivalry 
they sought to outdo each other in erecting enormous Gothic 
churches, and they employed the same style in many of their 
city halls and other public buildings. Art in general, after 

* What has been said about architecture applies fully only to western 
Europe. It does not concern Russia, which, as we have seen, had little 
in common with the rest of Europe, and it touches Italy only remotely. 
The examples of Italian Gothic architecture generally have only a lim- 
ited and formal rather than structural resemblance to the Gothic build- 
ings of western Europe, 



494 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

having been used for centuries almost exclusively in the service 
of the church and religion, began to be used by laymen to en- 
rich and beautify their life. They not only built for themselves 
magnificent Gothic palaces but also filled them with a pro- 
fusion of works of art. 

The people of the Middle Age spared no pains to make their 
churches beautiful. They decorated the exterior walls and 
roof with statues and bas-reliefs, and the interior with wall- 
paintings, statues, stained-glass windows, crucifixes, and other 
objects of art and beauty. Every church had also a number of 
chapels and altars which were also lavishly decorated with paint- 
ings, costly holy vessels, and various precious objects. So the 
churches of Europe, besides being venerable as churches, also 
possess the charm and interest of great museums of art. 

Sculpture was extensively practised, especially for the decora- 
tion of churches and public buildings. Architects made a most 
lavish use of it on the inside as well as on the outside of their 
buildings. Wherever it was possible they made a 
niche or a pedestal for one or more statues. Some 
of the cathedrals are decorated with hundreds of them, and the 
Milan cathedral has on its exterior alone more than two thou- 
sand. For the decoration of churches and public buildings 
Biblical characters and scenes and national heroes were gener- 
ally chosen. Reclining statues of kings and other great per- 
sons were frequently placed on their tombs. Crucifixes and 
statues of saints dotted the roadside, and innumerable statuettes 
in wood and ivory were made for the decoration of chapels and 
altars. From the illustrations shown between pages 490-491 
you might readily infer that the statues were often made not 
by artists but by stonemasons and other common laborers who 
possessed very little technical skill in their trade. In fact, 
however, the skill of the workmen who carved the statues no 
doubt surpassed the artists' ability to design. The poor stat- 
uary of the early Middle Age is no doubt due to the low artistic 
standard that prevailed and to the small inventing and design- 
ing ability of the artists of that time. Although mediaeval 
statues are in general technically imperfect, yet in spite of 



CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 495 

clumsy drapery, awkward postures, and defective modelling, 
many of them possess great charm, and some of them are of 
admirable merit, being cleverly modified in a structural sense 
to accord with the architecture they decorate. 

The art of painting was practised in the Middle Age chiefly 
for the decoration of churches and the illumination of manu- 
scripts. Especially the broad spaces on the walls of the Roman- 

. . esque churches invited the painter's brush, and it 

early became the custom to fill the windows with 
stained and painted glass. Painters knew nothing of drawing 
and painting from models or from nature, and their drawing 
was consequently very defective. They told their story in a 
conventional and often crude way. They had a stereotyped 
way of presenting Biblical characters and scenes, and no painter 
dared deviate very far from the traditional manner or type, 
until the freer spirit of the Renaissance began to make itself 
felt. Before Giotto only in the illumination of manuscripts 
did the painter's art show much personal originality. The 
monks delighted to illustrate and decorate their devotional 
books, choosing for their subjects events from the Bible and from 
the lives of the saints. Some of the illuminators possessed a 
marvellous fertility of design and excelled in decorative tracery, 
surrounding the picture with a perfect maze of graceful lines and 
figures, the whole in the most brilliant colors. 



CHAPTER XXVI 
THE RENAISSANCE 

In order to complete our study of the Middle Age we have 
yet to discuss one very important question: What brought about 
the change from the Middle Age to the Modern period? The 
cause is, of course, a very complex one, and is, to a great extent, 
to be found in what is called the Renaissance, a brief account of 
which is now to be given. 

First of all, however, as a general preparation for the change 
from Mediaeval to Modern, we must consider the fact that the 
peoples of Europe had made great progress in wealth and in all 
that wealth brings with it, and were therefore 
the Peoples, rapidly outgrowing their mediaeval conditions. In 
the cities there was developing a society that was 
ih many essential respects new. It was based not on nobility 
of birth, but rather on the possession of wealth. And since the 
wealth had generally been made through the personal efforts 
of its possessors, we may add that this society was based on 
individual worth and ability as well as on wealth. It contrasted 
strongly with feudal society, which had had its seat in the castle, 
perched on some hill more or less inaccessible. The nobles had 
spent their time in fighting, hunting, hawking, holding tourna- 
ments, and in other unproductive amusements and occupations. 
In the early centuries of feudalism the castle itself was meagrely 
furnished with simple, almost primitive furniture, and articles 
of comfort, to say nothing of luxury, were unknown. In the 
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, however, we find in the 
cities a new society composed of the common people who had 
grown rich through industry and commerce. Between the 
serfs of feudal days and the nobility there had appeared what 
we now call the great middle class, rich in resources, strong in 
the will to do, and keen in the power to reason and to know. 

This society in the cities was in many respects much like 

496 



THE RENAISSANCE 497 

modern society and practised the same forms of social inter- 
course and entertainment as are practised now. Dinner par- 
ties, dances, masked balls, picnics, birthday parties, 
and gay festivities in connection with marriages 
were some of the amusements which characterized this new 
society in the cities, very much as they characterize society to- 
day. Fortunes were spent in the lavish entertainment of guests. 
This society regarded social intercourse as a fine art and tried 
to express it in beautiful and appropriate forms. At the same 
time house-decorating became an art again, and large sums of 
money were expended by wealthy householders for objects of 
art and for luxurious and comfortable furniture and furnishings. 
It is evident, therefore, that the new society formed a good basis 
for the change to the Modern period and that a long step had 
already been taken away from the Mediaeval. The peoples of 
Europe, who, as we have seen, were barbarian in the fourth 
century, had in the intervening centuries developed much as a 
boy develops into a young man, and they were rapidly reaching 
their full intellectual stature. 

The heart of the Renaissance was humanism, a name that is 
applied to the new learning of the time. It was characterized 
by an intense admiration of everything that was ancient Roman 
rr • and the eager adoption and imitation of it. Pri- 

Humamsm. o ^ 

marily, it concerned itseK with the Latin language 
and literature, but the humanists, as its representa- 
tives are called, devoted themselves with boundless enthusi- 
asm to the study of every field of Roman antiquity. They 
sought to acquire the culture of ancient Rome by restoring 
her language, literature, ideas, and ideals. The Latin word, 
humanitas, "humanity," was used to express the highest and 
most harmonious culture of all the human faculties and powers. 
Hence the name humanism was applied to the new learning, 
because it was thought to be the best means for developing 
in each individual the true humanity, that is, the highest culture 
and refinement.- And the separate branches of study, such as 
Latin grammar, literature, poetry, history, and philology, came 
to be called the humanities. 



498 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Let us look first at Italian humanism, because the new learn- 
ing had its origin in that country.* Dante (i 265-1321) is gen- 
erally regarded as the great forerunner of humanism, and 
Petrarch (1304-13 74) its first great representative. 
Although Dante was not really a humanist and was 
not able to write a fine, clear Latin, nevertheless by his writings 
he did much to turn the thoughts of men toward Rome and her 
marvellous history. Of aU the Latin authors he especially ad- 
mired Vergil, whom he called his ''leader, master and lord." 
He gave himself up to the dream of restoring Rome to her ancient 
position as head of the world by making the city again the 
residence of the emperors with the same power and authority 
as the great emperors had once exercised. The world to-day, 
however, remembers him not for his efforts in that direction, 
but for his great poem, "The Divine Comedy," which he com- 
posed not in Latin, but in Italian. 

On the other hand, Petrarch was a master of Latin. He 
wrote it with great refinement of style and spoke it with fluency 
and accuracy. He regarded Cicero as the greatest master of 
style, and he had the distinction of discovering some 
of the forgotten letters and orations of that famous 
orator. He thereby gave a great impulse to the quest for manu- 
scripts containing the works of Latin authors. He wrote many 
works in Latin, on which he based his hope of fame. These, 
however, are now forgotten, and his literary fame rests on the 
beautiful poems and sonnets in Italian which he composed in 
his youth before he had become enamoured of Latin. 

The great popularity of Petrarch led to the rapid spread of 
humanistic studies in all parts of Italy, although the universi- 
ties were for some time uninfluenced by them. Hun- 
Humanists, dreds of young men imitated him, and there was 
soon a host of humanists seeking employment and 
preferment at the courts of the numerous little principalities 

* Of course Latin had been studied in all the schools of Europe, and 
there had been a revival of learning in the ninth century as a result 
of the attention which Charlemagne had bestowed on education. And 
there was a still greater revival of learning in the twelfth century, a 
prominent feature of which was the renewed study of Roman law. 



THE RENAISSANCE 499 

and republics into which Italy had become divided. Popes, 
princes, and the rich aristocracy in the cities vied with one 
another in surrounding themselves with humanists, whom they 
employed as secretaries, ambassadors, companions, and tutors, 
intrusting them especially with the education of their children. 
Throughout Italy these humanists developed a many-sided 
activity. They produced poems, histories, works of fancy, 
grammars, critical studies, and stories, or "novelettes," in the 
greatest profusion. Some of them extended the field of their 
studies to include mathematics, physics, and other sciences. 
Indeed, "humanist" came soon to be identical with "poly- 
histor," for his ideal was enlarged into the desire to know all 
that could be known and to excel in every field of endeavor.* 
It was, in fact, not uncommon for a humanist to achieve fame 
as a poet, a prose-writer, athlete, scientist, painter, sculptor, 
and architect. His ambition was to be complete in his many- 
sidedness. 

The Greek language and literature shared in the general ad- 
miration which the humanists had for antiquity. Merely to 
possess a Greek manuscript was a coveted distinction; a large 
sum was paid for a manuscript of Homer, although 
Greek.° ^^6 purchaser could not read a word of it. Greeks 

were eagerly sought as teachers of their language. 
The first Greek teacher of note in Italy was Chrysoloras (1355- 
141 5), who, at the pressing invitation of the people of Florence, 
came to that city and accepted a professorship of Greek (1396). 
He met with immense success and many of the greatest men in 
Florence became his pupils. He travelled extensively in the 
west and was at various times engaged in many of the Italian 
cities as a teacher of Greek. Toward the middle of the fifteenth 
century many Greeks, attracted by the rewards offered, came 
into Italy, where they won fame and wealth as teachers of 
Greek and translators of Greek writings. 

* Polyhistor, a universal scholar; i. e., one who has a large knowl- 
edge of all the departments, or fields, of learning and endeavor. This 
was the ideal which many men in the Renaissance pursued and vir- 
tually attained. 



Soo EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

Italy was the home of humanism and of the Renaissance in 
general. Rome, being the head of the Christian world, an- 
nually drew many thousands who came on business connected 

with the church. These and thousands of pil- 
HumanSm. grims and merchants no doubt helped spread the 

ideas of the Renaissance. Travelling scholars and 
professors and artists, however, probably did the larger part of 
the work of dissemination. Naturally it spread to the neigh- 
boring countries first. Early in the fifteenth century the new 
learning was enthusiastically adopted in France and in Ger- 
many, and somewhat later it spread to England. In those 
northern countries, however, it took on a more serious character, 
and many humanists devoted themselves to the study of the 
Bible. Erasmus, the greatest of all the humanists, employed 
his scholarship in making a critical edition of the New Testa- 
ment in Greek — the first one ever published — ^with a corrected 
Latin translation and learned notes. He was a bitter critic 
of the ignorance that prevailed among the monks and clergy 
and hoped to bring about the desired reform in the church 
through the spread of the new learning. And Melanchthon, 
the greatest of the German humanists, was closely associated 
with Luther and his reform movement. 

The revival of learning had an important effect on education. 
Universities and schools had deteriorated because the course of 
study and the methods of teaching had become stereotyped, and 

students thought only of acquiring sufficient train- 
EducSion. '^^K ^o enable them to fill the positions which they 

hoped to obtain. In becoming merely vocational, 
education had lost much of its power to enlarge and beautify 
life. Now, in the minds of the humanists that was the chief 
object of education. So they naturally sought to change the 
course of study in such a way as to acquire the broadest and 
most perfect culture. The dull text-books that had been in 
use they replaced with the great masterpieces of Rome and 
Greece. In the classroom they read the works of Cicero, Vergil, 
Plautus, Aristotle (in Latin translation), and other great authors, 
with an appreciation and enthusiasm that have never been sur- 



THE RENAISSANCE 501 

passed. The humanists made the course of study more effective 
by their better method of teaching and enriched it by the in- 
troduction of new subjects. In the course of study were to be 
found Latin, Greek, Hebrew, philology, psychology, physics, 
mathematics, history, geography, astronomy, law, medicine, 
and theology. The chief reform, however, was in the new spirit 
and method of teaching and studying. The universities gen- 
erally opposed the new learning and the reform in education, 
but humanists established some new universities and inde- 
pendent schools, and the old universities were eventually forced 
to join the new movement. The old learning had been entirely 
under the control of the church; it was theological and scholastic. 
That is, it sought to co-ordinate all knowledge into one great 
system that would be in harmony with the creed of the church. 
The new learning was secular; it resisted all ecclesiastical 
domination and interference. The humanists generally sought 
first of all the truth, regardless of whether it agreed with the 
creed or not. The church must be made to conform to the 
truth, not the truth to the creed of the church. 

In the field of art the Renaissance brought in a radical 
change. Roman architecture also shared in the admiration 
which the humanists felt for antiquity. In Italy there were 
still many Roman buildings in existence, so it is only natural 
that they should have had a marked influence on the architects 
of the time. Discarding the features that had characterized 
the Byzantine, the Romanesque, and the Gothic, they revived 
the Roman, or classical, style, employing the three ancient orders 
of architecture, the Doric, the Ionic, and the Corinthian. The 
huge size of many of the buildiugs which they erected permitted 
them to use all these orders in the same building, the Doric in 
the first story, the Ionic in the second, and the Corinthian in the 
third. The existence of a rich class in the cities created a de- 
mand for immense palaces, some of which are still the admiration 
of the world. They were frequently built of massive stone 
blocks, which in the lower story were left rough-hewn to increase 
the impression of strength and sohdity. In the upper stories 
the blocks were generally smoother and less massive. And the 



502 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

whole building was crowned with a cornice of great width, which 
both added dignity and beauty to the building and protected 
it to some extent against the sun's rays. The new art, like the 
new learning, had its origin in Italy, and from there it spread 
in the course of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries to the other 
countries of western Europe and gradually displaced all other 
styles of architecture. 

The artistic sense of the people, which for some centuries 
had kept step with their intellectual growth and improvement, 
was undoubtedly quickened by the study of the remains of 
Influence of ^^^ient art. By chance some fine Roman sculpture 
Roman was discovered by workmen who were making an 

Statuary. - ^ i •, • • ^ 

excavation, and to those who saw it it was a revela- 
tion of the beauty of the human form. In this way the people 
of that time were led to see that the ideal of the ancient artists 
had been to express physical beauty, while artists in the Middle 
Age had in early periods treated sculpture in general as ecclesi- 
astical symbolism, though occasionally giving their figures spiri- 
tual expression, and in Gothic times sculpture was remarkable 
for realism. Under the stimulus of the beauty of these newly 
found statues sculptors began to copy and to imitate them, 
and from this they were led to draw and model from nature 
and from the human figure. Painters followed their example 
and soon both painting and sculpture had become new arts. 
From the illustrations between pages 490-491, you can easily 
see that the Renaissance artists excelled in drawing and in 
technical skill in executing their works and that their object 
was to express beauty in the human form. 

The study of antiquity did not, however, absorb all the inter- 
est and energy of the people. They were no less active in ex- 
ploring the earth and in learning its extent, its resources, and its 
^ , ^. peoples. Never before had there been manifested 

Exploration r- tr 

and SO much interest in exploration and discovery. The 

Discovery \ . 

crusades (1096- 1270) had awakened a strong cun- 
osity about foreign lands and peoples, which was quickened 
and reinforced by the gain to be derived from commerce with 
them. The first great traveller was Marco Polo (i 254-1325), 



THE RENAISSANCE 



503 



a Venetian, who was led by a variety of interests to spend 

many years in travel and residence in Asia. While a prisoner 

of war in Genoa he was persuaded to tell about his 

Marco Polo , * 

travels and experiences and a fellow prisoner com- 
mitted his story to writing. Polo's recognition as prince of 
mediaeval travellers is due to his romantic story and to the vast 
compass of his travels. His book is a rich mine of information 
about Asia and the islands along its shores, and, although there 
are many passages that seemed incredible, yet further explora- 
tion and study have proved the general correctness of his nar- 
rative. 

The desire to make pilgrimages and the pure love of travel 
and adventure brought about a gradual increase in the number 
of travellers and led to the making of guide-books to assist 
^ . J ^ , them in finding their way. The most noted of these 

Guide-books ° "^ 

guide-books passes under the name of The Travels 
of Sir John Ma7tdeville, and, although this is probably a ficti- 
tious name, there can be no doubt that these travels were 
widely read and that they had considerable influence in spread- 
ing geographical knowledge and in promoting the spirit of voyage 
and discovery in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. 

Mercantile interests, however, furnished the chief motive 
for exploring the world. You will recall that in the fourteenth 
and fifteenth centuries the Turks conquered the eastern Med- 
iterranean lands and thereby cut off the Italian 
Interests.^ cities from direct commerce with the orient. That 
not only diminished the business and profits of west- 
ern merchants, but also raised the price of pepper and other 
spices, to the use of which the western nations had become ad- 
dicted. The west was therefore forced to hunt for another 
route to the east. And this could be only by way of the ocean. 
Now, navigation was just then improved by the use of the com- 
pass, the invention of the astrolabe (an instrument used to de- 
termine the position of ships), and the building of ships with 
high decks to keep out the waves. 

In the quest for a water-route to the east Portugal led the 
way. A Portuguese prince, Henry the Navigator (1394-1460), 



504 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

devoted most of his life to this work. He established a school 
of navigation on the coast near Cape St. Vincent, in which he 

trained a number of men in the art of navigation. 

Every year he sent out exploring expeditions, 
some of which discovered the Madeira islands and explored a 
large part of the west coast of Africa. Finally his dream of 
reaching the Indies by sailing around Africa was realized when 
Vasco da Gama rounded the Cape of Good Hope and after 
some weeks cast anchor in the bay of Calcutta (1497). 

Spaniards also were interested in reaching the Indies, and 
Columbus, believing that the earth was round, conceived the 
idea of sailing around it to the rich source of supplies in the east. 

After his discovery of land (1492) others followed in 

his wake. Ponce de Leon explored Florida in 15 13; 
in the same year Balboa discovered the Pacific, and Cortes in- 
vaded Mexico in 15 19. England and France also sent out many 
exploring expeditions which added to the world's geographical 
knowledge. The period of voyage and discovery reached its 
culmination in the journey around the world, which Magellan 
began in 15 19. Although he met his death at the hands of the 
natives of the Philippines, some of his vessels safely reached 
the port in Spain from which they had sailed. It is difiicult 
for us even to imagine how great was the stimulus which all 
these discoveries imparted to the peoples of western Europe. 

It is impossible to calculate the effect on the general course 
of history and civilization of a few great inventions which came 
into common use during the period of the Renaissance. First 

of these was the compass. Without it mariners 
Compass ^^^ been forced to sail continually in sight of land 

or to guide their course by the sun by day and the 
stars by night. But the heavenly bodies could not be de- 
pended on because they were often hidden by clouds, and 
shoals and rocks and sudden winds made it dangerous to keep 
near the coast. Navigation was thus hampered until the mar- 
iner's compass came into use. It is certain that the Chinese, 
probably as early as the Christian era, used the magnetic 



THE RENAISSANCE 505 

needle to guide their boats. From China the knowledge and 
use of it eventually spread into western Asia and from there 
the Arabs introduced it into Europe. Mention was made of it 
by a Mohammedan poet of Spain in 853 A. D., and by Christian 
writers about three centuries later. In the thirteenth cen- 
tury it came into common use by sailors, who were thereby made 
independent of all landmarks as well as of the heavenly bodies. 
Needless to say, the introduction of the compass into Europe 
made possible the brilliant achievements of the new man in his 
work of exploring the world. 

Gunpowder, too, like the mariner's compass, was invented in 

China, although it was first used in firearms on a large scale 

and in an effective way after it was introduced into Europe. 

The weapons in which it was used at first lacked 

Gunpowder. . . ^ 

precision and were consequently somewhat inef- 
fective, but in time they were so improved that, with the 
use of gunpowder, the art and practice of war and of defense 
were completely revolutionized. The castle of the mediaeval 
baron, which had been impregnable because of its lofty position, 
was no longer secure against artillery attacks. Coats of mail, 
which had offered sufficient resistance to arrows, soon ceased 
to be worn, because they gave little or no protection against 
bullets. The longbow, the crossbow, and the pike disap- 
peared, being displaced by more deadly weapons possessing a 
longer range and greater power of penetration. Cities no longer 
enjoyed complete protection and safety, because their walls 
and buildings could be battered down by cannon. The high 
stone walls of the mediaeval city, being no longer a protection, 
were supplemented and eventually displaced by a series of 
fortresses which surrounded the city and barred the way 
against an invading army. And gunpowder also helped the 
king increase his power over his subjects, for his greater wealth 
enabled him to hire and keep in the field a larger standing 
army and to equip it with more and better artillery than his 
vassals possessed." With such advantages in his favor the 
king was able to destroy the independence of his great vassals 



5o6 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

and to make himself absolute master of his realm. The kings 
of Spain, of France, and of England owed their great power in 
the sixteenth century chiefly to gunpowder. So it may fairly 
be said that the use of gunpowder hastened the destruction 
of feudalism and the centralization of power in the king's 
hands. 

Not less important than the invention of gunpowder was that 
of paper. A most serious hindrance to the spread of knowledge 
during the Middle Age was the cost of books. They were 
written by hand on parchment or vellum, which was 
prepared in a laborious manner from the skins of 
animals, chiefly of sheep, goaits, and calves. The cost of such 
parchments made books very expensive, and it was impossible 
to produce them rapidly and cheaply until some less expensive 
material for them should be found and a faster way of reproduc- 
ing them than by hand. Again it was China to which Europe 
was indebted for an important invention, the process of making 
paper. More than eighteen hundred years ago the Chinese 
made paper by reducing rags, linen, hemp, cotton, rice-straw, 
and the inner bark of the mulberry-tree, to a pulp in water, and 
then spreading it out in a thin layer to dry. From China the 
art of making paper spread to the west by way of India and 
Persia. The Mohammedans practised it throughout their 
empire. From the Mohammedans in Spain it passed to the 
Christians, and, before 1500, paper was extensively made in 
every country of Europe. The invention of movable type, 
which made printing easy and rapid, created a great demand 
for it, and its manufacture soon became an important industry. 
This invention of movable type, about the middle of the 
fifteenth century, revolutionized the making of books. Print- 
ing was not unknown, for small books had already 
Type. been printed from blocks, each block printing a 

Gutenberg whole page. The important thing here was the 
invention of movable type, each type representing a 
letter. In spite of some uncertainty in the matter, it is gen- 
erally believed that John Gutenberg, a resident of Mainz, 



THE RENAISSANCE 507 

in Germany, deserves the credit for this invention. At any 
rate, he excelled all others in his improved way of making 
type and hence may properly be regarded as the inventor. 
He melted metal and cast the single letters in moulds, thus 
making them all of the same size or font. For some years the 
secret of his invention was known only to the printers of Mainz 
and of the neighboring cities. But when Mainz was sacked in 
1462 (in a war against its archbishop), the printers of the city 
were scattered, the art became public property, and printing- 
presses were soon established in nearly all the cities of Europe. 
There is great uncertainty, it may be said, about the date 
of publication of the first book. We know, however, that in 
1448 Gutenberg was engaged in printing in Mainz, where he 
probably first produced a few small books or pamphlets. He 
printed the Bible as early as 1456, although some believe that 
he may have printed it several years earlier. The first printed 
book bearing a date is from the year 1457. 

At the end of the fifteenth century Europe was all astir 
with new ideas and interests. Art, learning, literature, industry, 
commerce, and all that goes to make up civilization were flour- 
ishing as never before, and everything indicated 
ofWar.^ that Europe was entering on a period of rapid 
development in civilization, which should surpass 
that of all previous ages. The Renaissance man, abounding 
with life, energy, and ambition, justified the hope that he was 
about to master the world and its secrets and to inaugurate a 
golden age of progress in all the fields of his activity. This 
high promise, however, was, for various reasons, not entirely 
fulfilled. In the first place, the various powers that engaged in 
discovering the new lands began to fight for the possession of 
them. Moreover, ambition — a common characteristic of the 
Renaissance man — ^led many rulers to covet the lands of neigh- 
boring states, and so there was inaugurated a long period ^f 
international wars for conquest. And, finally, the generaK^^- 
situation was complicated and embittered by the fact that the 
freer religious movement met with stubborn resistance and led 



5o8 EUROPE IN THE MIDDLE AGE 

to gigantic and ruinous civil struggles. These wars, religious, 
civil, and international, involved all of western Europe, and 
effectively checked the course of civilization that had made so 
rapid progress during the Renaissance. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 

No attempt is made to give a complete bibliography of the 
history of the Middle Age. 

Works on Bibliography and Source Material 

Langlois, Manuel de Bihliographie Historique. 2 vols. 

Potthast, Wegweiser durch die Geschichtswerke des Europaischen MitteU 

alters his 1500. 2 vols, 
Dahlmann-Waitz, Quellenkunde der deutschen Geschichte. 
Molinier, Les Sources de I'Histoire de France des Origines aux Guerres 

d' Italic. 3 vols. 
Gross, Sources of English History. 

Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter. 2 vols. 
Early Chroniclers of Europe. 3 vols. England, Gairdner; France, 

Masson; Italy, Balzani. 

Historical Atlases 
Droysen, Schrader, Putzger, Poole, Spruner-Menke, Dow, Shepard. 

Source Books 

Thatcher and McNeal, Source Book for Mediceval History (cited S. B.). 

Ogg, A Source Book of Medieval History (cited O.). 

Robinson, Readings in European History, vol, I (cited R.). 

Munro and Sellery, Medieval Civilization. 

Henderson, Selected Documents of the Middle Ages. 

Translations and Reprints from the Original Sources of European His- 
tory. (The University of Pennsylvania.) 

Adams and Stephens, Select Documents of English Constitutional His- 
tory (cited A. and S.). 

Munro, A Source Book for Roman History (cited M.). 

Lee, Source Book of English history (cited L.). 

Cheyney, Readings in English History drawn from the Original Sources 
(cited Ch.). 

Colby, Selections from the Sources of English History. 

Bell, English History Source Books. 

Works op a More or Less General Character 

Lavisse, General View of the Political History of Europe. 
Lavisse et Rambaud, Histoire generate du IV Siecle a no$ Jours. (First 
four volumes deal with the Middle Age.) 

509 



Sio BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The Cambridge Medieval History. 2 vols, have appeared. 

The Cambridge Modern History, vol. I. 

Assmann, Geschichte des Mittelalters. 2 vols. 

C. R. L. Fletcher, The Making of Western Europe, 300 to 1190. 2 vols. 

C. F. Young, East and West through Fifteen Centuries. 4 vols. 

Masterman, The Dawn of Medieval Europe, 476-918. 

Lee, The Central Period of the Middle Age, 918-1273. 

Lodge, The End of the Middle Age, 1273-1453. 

Oman, The Dark Ages, 476-918. 

Tout, The Empire and the Papacy, 918-1273. 

Lodge, The Close of the Middle Ages, 12 73-1 494. 

Hallam, View of the States of Europe in the Middle Ages, 

Stille, Studies in Medieval Europe. 

Emerton, Introduction to the Middle Ages, 

MedicBval Europe. 

Beginnings of Modern Europe. 
Thorndike, The History of Medieval Europe. 

Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, edited by J. B. Bury. 
H. O. Taylor, The Medieval Mind. 2 vols. 
Maitland, The Dark Ages. 
Adams, Civilization during the Middle Ages. 
Guizot, History of Civilization. 
Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire. 
H. Fisher, The Medieval Empire. 2 vols. 
Richter, Annalen des deutschen Reiches. 3 vols. 
Jastrow- Winter, Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Hohenstaufen. 
Loserth, Geschichte des spdteren Mittelalters. 
Henderson, History of Germany in the Middle Ages, 
Lavisse, Histoire de France. 8 vols. 
MacDonald, History of France. 3 vols. 
Kitchin, History of France. • 3 vols. 
Traill, Social England, vols, i, 2. 
Newman, Manual of Church History, vol. I. 
Alzog, Manual of Universal Church History. 3 vols. 
Milman, History of Latin Christianity. 
Schaff , History of the Christian Church, vols. 1-4. 



Works of Special Reference to Particular Chapters 

introduction 

Thomas, Source Book for Social Origins, pp. 1-139, with bibliography. 
Semple, The Influence of Geographic Environment. 

chapter I. THE ROMAN EMPIRE 

Friedlander, Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms. 2 vols. 
Dill, Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western Empire, 
Taylor, The Classical Heritage of the Middle Ages, 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 511 



CHAPTER II. THE INVASIONS. CHAPTER III. JUSTINIAN 

Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders. 8 vols. 

The Dynasty of Theodosius. 

Theodoric the Goth. 
Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire. 2 vols. 
Villari, The Barbarian Invasions of Italy. 2 vols. 
Augustine, City of God (tr. by John Healey in the Temple Classics). 

CHAPTER IV. THE FRANKS. CHAPTER V. THE HOUSE OF 
CHARLEMAGNE 

Davis, Charlemagne. 

Hodgkin, Charles the Great. 

Mombert, History of Charles the Great. 

Sergeant, The Franks. 

Gregory of Tours, History of the Franks (tr. by Brehaut in Records of 

Civilization) . 
Einhard, Life of Charlemagne (tr. by Turner). 
For the Northmen and the Normans, who are frequently mentioned: 

Johnson, The Normans. 

Haskins, The Normans in European History. 

Keary, The Vikings in Western Europe. 

CHAPTER VII. FEUDALISM 

Seignobos, The Feudal Regime. 
Luchaire, Social France. 
Cornish, Chivalry. 

Cheyney, Documents Illustrative of Feudalism (Translations and Re- 
prints, vol. 4, no. 3). 

CHAPTER VIII. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PAPACY 

Hatch, Growth of Church Institutions. 

Duchesne, The Early Church. 

Wells, The Age of Charlemagne (Epochs of Church History). 

CHAPTER IX. MONASTICISM 

Rogers, Students^ History of Philosophy, pp. 1 19-190. 
Wishart, A Short History of Monks and Monasticism. 
Montalembert, The Monks of the West. 
Workman, The Evolution of the Monastic Ideal. 
Harnack, Monasticism. 

CHAPTER X. GERMANY AND THE EMPIRE 

Stubbs, Germany in the Early Middle Ages. 

CHAPTER XI. EMPIRE AND PAPACY. FIRST PERIOD 

Mathew, Life and Times of Hildehrand. 

Stephens, Hildehrand and His Times (Epochs of Church History). 



512 BIBLIOGRAPHY 



CHAPTER XII, CHAPTER XIII. EMPIRE AND PAPACY. SECOND AND THIRD 

PERIODS 

Balzani, The Popes and the Hohenstaufen. 
Kingston-Oliphant, History of Frederick II. 2 vols. 

CHAPTER XIV. MOHAMMED 

Gilman, The Saracens. 

Lane- Poole, Speeches and Table-Talk of the Prophet Mohammed. 

Palmer, Translation of the Koran. 

Margoliouth, Mohammed (Heroes of the Nations). 

CHAPTER XV. THE CRUSADES 

Archer and Kingford, The Crusades. 

Neale, The Story of the Crusades. 

von Sybel, The History and Literature of the First Crusade (tr. by Lady 

Duff Gordon). 
Pears, The Fall of Constantinople. 
Condor, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. 
Archer, The Crusade of Richard I. 
Kugler, Geschichte der Kreuzzuge. 
Rohricht, Geschichte des ersten Kreuzzuges, 

Geschichte des Konigreiches Jerusalem. 
Gray, The Children's Crusade. 

CHAPTER XVI. GROWTH OF THE FRENCH NATION 

Adams, Growth of the French Nation. 
Hutton, Philip Augustus. 
Perry, St. Louis. 

Joinville, Life of St, Louis (Chronicles of the Crusades, Everyman's 
Library). 

CHAPTER XVII. THE ORIGINS OF THE ENGLISH NATION. 

Oman, England before the Norman Conquest. 

Hodgkin, Political History of England to 1066. 

Plummer, Life and Times of Alfred the Great. 

Bede and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (tr. by Giles in Bohn's Library). 

CHAPTER XVIII. FORMATION OF THE ENGLISH NATION 

Adams, Political History of England, 1066-1216. 

Davis, England under the Normans and Angevins. 

Tout, Edward I. 

Medley, English Constitutional History. 

Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law through Edward I. 

CHAPTER XIX. THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR. FIRST PART 

Longman, Life and Times of Edward III. 2 vols. 
Tout, Political History of England, 12 16-1377. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 513 



Trevelyan, England in the Age of Wyclif. 
Oman, The Great Revolt of 1381. 
Froissart, Chronicle (Globe edition). 

CHAPTER XX. THE HUNDRED YEARS* WAR. SECOND PART 

Vickers, England in the Later Middle Ages. 

Oman, Political History of England, 1 377-1485. 

Lowell, Joan of A re. 

James, Joan of Arc. 

Lang, The Maid of Orleans. 

Commines, Memoirs (Bohn Library, 2 vols.). 

CHAPTER XXI. DECLINE OF THE PAPACY 

Pastor, History of the Popes, vol. I. 

Creighton, History of the Papacy, vol. L 

Van Dyke, Age of the Renascence (Epochs of Church History). 

Lea, History of the Inquisition. 

CHAPTER XXII. GERMANY, I25O-I5OO 

Stubbs, Germany in the Later Middle Ages. 

CHAPTER XXIV. CITIES AND CITY LIFE 

Histories of Commerce: Gibbins, Heyd, Day. 
Industrial Histories: Levasseur, Cunningham, Cheyney. 
Jusserand, English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages. 
Zimmern, The Hansa Towns. 
Symonds, The Age of the Despots. 

CHAPTER XXV. CIVILIZATION AND CULTURE 

Rashdall, History of the Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages. 

3 vols. 
Laurie. The Rise of the Universities (Humboldt Library). 
Sabatier, St. Francis of Assisi. 
Jessopp, Coming of the Friars. 
The Little Flowers of St. Francis (Temple Classics). 
Literature of the Middle Age in translation: 

Butler, The Song of Roland. 

Newell, King Arthur. 2 vols. (From Chrestien de Troyes.) 

Nihelungenlied (Everyman's Library). 
Cox and Jones, Popular Romances of the Middle Ages. 
Moore, Gothic Architecture. 

CHAPTER XXVI. THE RENAISSANCE 

Symonds, The Renaissance in Italy. 

Geiger, Humanismus und Renaissance in Italien und Deutschland. 

Voigt, Wiederhelebung des classischen Altertums. 2 vols. 

Armstrong, Lorenzo de' Medici. 

Robinson and Rolfe, Petrarch. 

Machiavelli, The Prince (Bohn Library). 



514 BIBLIOGRAPHY 



Historical Novels 

Hardy, Passe-Rose (the age of Charlemagne). 

von Scheffel, Ekkehard (tenth century). 

Scott, Ivanhoe (the crusades). The Talisman (the crusades), Quentin 

Durward (time of Louis XI). 
Reade, The Cloister and the Hearth (fifteenth century). 
Kingsley, Hypatia (fourth century), Hereward the Wake (England in 

the time of William the Conqueror). 
Porter, Scottish Chiefs (Scotland in the time of Edward I). 
Lytton, The Last of the Barons (time of the war of the Roses). 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 
I 

EMPERORS AND POPES 



Note. — The table of Emperors is complete from Charlemagne on; the table of 
Popes contains only the more important names. 

Note 2. — ^The names in itah"cs are those of German kings who never made any claim 
to the imperial title. Those marked with an * were never actually crowned at Rome. 
Charles V. was crowned by the Pope, but at Bologna, not at Rome. 



Year of 
Accession. 


Popes. 


Emperors. 


Year of 
Accession. 


A.D. 






A.D. 


314 


Sylvester I. (d. 336). 


Constantine (the Great), 








alone. 


323 






Julian the Apostate. 


361 






Theodosius I. 


379 






Arcadius (in the East), 








Honorius (in the West). 


395 






Theodosius II. (E.). 


408 






Valentinianlll. (W.). 


424 


440 


Leo I. (the Great). 








(d. 461). 


Romulus Augustulus 








(W.). 


475 






(Western line ends with 








Romulus Augustulus, 








476.) 








[Till 800, there are Em- 






• 


perors only at Constan- 








tinople. '\ 








Anastasius I. 


491 






Justin I. 


518 






Justinian. 


527 






Justin 11. 


565 


590 


Gregory I. (the Great), 
d. 604. 






715 


Gregory II. 







515 



Si6 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



Year of 
Accession. 


Popes. 


Emperors. 


Year of 
Accession. 


A.D. 






A.D. 






Leo III. (the Isaurian). 


718 


731 


Gregory III. 






741 


Zacharias. 






752 


Stephen II. 






752 


Stephen III. 






772 


Hadrian L 










Constantine VI. 


780 






(Deposition of Constan- 








tine VI. by Irene, 797.) 








[The table gives hence- 








forth only the Empe- 








rors of the new West- 








ern line.] 




795 


Leo III. 










Charlemagne. 


800 






Ludwig I. 


814 


816 


Stephen IV. (d. 817). 










Lothar I. 


840 






Ludwig II. (in Italy). 


855 


872 


John VIII. (d. 882). 










Charles II. (the Bald). 


875 






Charles III. (the Fat). 


881 


88s 


Stephen V. 






891 


Formosus. 


Guido (in Italy). 


891 






Lambert (in Italy). 


894 


896 


Boniface VI. 






896 


Stephen VI. (d. 897). 


Arnulf. 


896 






Ludwig^ the Child, 


899 






Louis III. of Provence 








(in Italy). 


901 






Conrad I. 


911 






Berengar (in Italy). 


915 






Henry I. {the Fowler). 


918 


955 


John XIL 


Otto /., Khtg^, 936; Em- 








peror, 962. 


962 


963 


Leo VIII. (d. 96s). 










Otto II. 


973 






Otto III. 


983 






Henry II. (the Holy). 


1002 






Conrad II. (the Sahc). 


1024 






Henry III. (the Black). 


1039 






Henry IV. 


1056 


1057 


Stephen IX. 






1058 


Benedict X. 






1059 


Nicholas II. 






1061 


Alexander II. 






1073 


Gregory VII. (Hilda- 
brand). 


(Rudolph of Suabia, ri- 








val.) 


1077 


1080 


(Clement, Anti-pope. ) 


(Hermann of Luxem- 








burg, rival.) 


1081 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



517 



Year of 
Accession. 


Popes. 


Emperors. 


Year of 
Accession. 


A.D. 






A.D. 


1086 


Victor III. 






1087 


Urban II. 


(Conrad of Franconia, ri- 








val.) 


1093 


1099 


Paschal II. 










Henry V. 


1 106 


II18 


Gelasius II. 






ZII9 


Calixtus II. (d. 1124). 










Lothar II. 


1 125 






*Conrad III. 


II38 






Frederick I. (Barbaros- 








sa). 


1 152 


"54 


Hadrian IV. 






"59 


Alexander III. (d. iiBi). 






"59 


(Victor Anti-pope). 










Henry VI. 


1 190 






*Philip of Suabia, Otto 








IV. (rivals). 


"97 


1 198 


Innocent III. 










Otto IV. , alone. 


1208 






Frederick II. 


1212 


1216 


Honorius III. 






1227 


Gregory IX. 






1241 


Celestine IV. 






1243 


Innocent IV. (d. 1254). 










(Henry Raspe, rival.) 


1246 






(William of Holland, ri- 








val.) 


1246 






*Conrad IV. 


1250 






Interregntnn. 


1254 






*Richard of Cornwall and 








*Alfonso of Castile, ri- 








vals. 


1257 


1271 


Gregory X. (d, 1276). 










*Rudolph I. of Hapsburg, 


1273 


1277 


Nicholas III. (d. 1281). 










*Adolph of Nassau. 


1292 


1294 


Boniface VIII. 










*AlbrechtI. of Hapsburg. 


1298 


1303 


Benedict XI. 






1305 


Clement V. (who re- 
moves Papacy to 
Avignon). 


Henry VII. of Luxem- 








burg. 


1308 






Louis IV. of Bavaria. 


1314 






(Frederick of Austria, ri- 








val.) 




1316 


John XXII. (d. 1334). 


Charles IV. of Luxem- 








burg. 


1347 






(Gunther of Schwarz- 








burg, rival.) 




1352 


Innocent VI. 







Si8 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



Year of 
Accession. 


Popes. 


Emperors. 


Year of 
Accession. 


A.D. 






A.D. 


1362 


Urban V. 






1370 


Gregory XI. (who 
brings Papacy back 
to Rome). 






1378 


Urban VI. 

(Clement VI., Anti- 
pope. ) [Here begins 
the Great Schism.'\ 


*Wenzel of Luxemburg. 
*Rupert of the Palati- 


1378 






nate. 


1400 






Sigismund of Luxem- 








burg. 


1410 


I4I7 


Martin V. [Great 
Schism healed.\ 






I43I 


Eugene IV. 


♦Albert II. of Haps- 








burg. 


1438 






Frederick III. of Haps- 








burg. 


1440 


1447 


Nicholas V. 






1455 


Calixtus IV. 






1458 


Pius II. (.^neas Picco- 
lomini). 






1464 


Paul II. 






1471 


Sixtus IV. 






1484 


Innocent VIII. 






1492 


Alexander VI. (Bor- 
gia), d. 1503. 


*Maximilian I. of Haps- 

burg. 
Charles V. of Hapsburg. 








1493 
1519 



This table has been compiled from Bryce's Holy Roman Empire, with 
the kind permission of the publishers. The Macmillan Company. 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



519 



o 
o 

o 

H 

en 

O 

o 

I— I 

> 
o 

p^ 

w 



I 






°°*ir oJ> 



lO 



.£3 

U 



^ 00 
^- 

o'o-S 





10 






u 




<u 


.12 


J3 


'u 


1) 


C« 


2 


fX, 




<-l«l 


r \ 





U 


bo 




G 



^ 



^ C 



• in 

o 52-2 

o o 
G a 
S2 



„• "^G a 



^ o « 

O bo 

bO.S 



M 



SI 



in <*> 

•55-0 
nj G 






M 



'^'g' V 3^ fcl 5 — 



bo O "^ 

(Jn bo 

G 



c 

3 

3 

m 

G a i 

o 5^ 



■^ 4-> w. 
« Ml M) 

2 5 3 



.5 G 
01 



fc4 



O 



bo 
C 

2 



G H 

■HSi 

- V o "i 

■03 

3-0^ 
-^ CS<*J 

H "> o 

Gt3 

ta a 



o 

ho 

a 



i2 



^ 



Charibert, 

ing of Pari 

561-67. 




fc4 







bO 

c 


r <^ 


s 


)-H .. 




ij a 


be 


•"•■Jfl 





-^2 

Ho 



a 


Q 


bo 


■4J 


c 





'^ 


s 














a 




V 




.a 









bO 




tU 




fl 



i_2 c/> 
3 


tfS 


•0 2 


Ml 




is 


3 1> M 


3<« ^ 


3<*j 




•^f" 


^? 


H^ 


H^ 


^ 


12 


S 



M 
H 
O 



ki 



S20 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



04 






o 

o 

H 
w 

U 



C/2 

H 
O 

CO 

Q 



o 



II. 

.2 .;, -S 






i^ "C 







M 



V 4 

- O "1 

II 



P4 



O 



•a 
_ o 

!■ 

O 



l-s 

(U W 












.og. 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



521 



o 

a 
< 

^^ 
O 

w 

< 

t-H 

o 
I— I 

§ 

u 



2 






^ 



.a 



5~ o 



"I 

II — 



8 . 



l-< . "P 



.5 + 



-•§00 



"3+ 



O 



K^ coo 
2 



o C 
c ^ 



u 



5? t^oT 
Soo-^ 

•C°o£ 
•n *J o . 

.Q Oi^ 00 



c c 
o> 

•£ rtoo 
•go 

•O ho 



G f^ 

M 00 

p O « 

C OO , ^ 



-3 t^ 
O 00 






Ph 



3 






^1 

rt 3 



— „ O lo ' 
^ . in 



be 00 
C 

5 



-pQ ^ a, «« 

1^3 






s 

•3 . s 

croo _, 

."^00_-R 

0+ .2^ 

c an 



&4 



J 

■ ? C 

t-5 • 
^1—1 00 

to 

a 



\4 



O 
I 



H 

I 



522 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



W 

X 
O 

o 

w 

M 

H 
W . 

< 

Xfl > 

^f4 



< 

"A 

o 



xn 

C 

•-) 

o 

1^ 

u 
p< 



u 






IS 






i" 



Ox 



s 









5'S « 



C.2. 

S c 

4) O VO 

^1 



rt^ 



c 
p 
o 
O 






fc4 



I 

o 

- r >o 



9 
O 



2vo 



o 



6 

O o^ 



O . 

o 



bO 



w 



o^ 






«l 






5-a o 



3 . 

o of 



i 



•ta 



»<*- 14^ 00 *;> ON 

2 C oo»> 00 



"o u o 

"H-^ bO 
nag* 



bo 
55^ 



o 

bO 

.3 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



523 



w 

D 

o 

Pi! 
O 

h 

O 

H 

Q 
12; 
< 

O 
O 

o 



D 

< » 

OS 

o 



o 

M 

_C 
o 



(I. 









!« 




ii 


.8 « 


!^3 




cfl 2 


^ 2 


5W 




<; 




Q 





11:1 

(4 

a 
a 



S 



I O 00 



ir> ^s — O" 

» ^ <U 

o 



-**- ] *^ i . 



^ 



c» 



00 



cy. 



^ 



4) \0 






•O 10 
C4 S' 






u 



^2 

•T3 <:^'-' 



^ 



S ° 



C 

« M. 
*J O 

73 -^ 

ll 
CO 

•a 

(4 






: afe^ 

• ^ S 2 
6^5 



S > bO 

sec 



<J o 



>^oo 
Co m 



U 00 



•O t^ 



c4 



^ 



a-ii c 

C *« O 

•3 bOu) 

SCO a 
. "3 o 



524 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



c/5 

CO 
CO 

D 
O 

K 

Ph 

< 
H 

CO 

w 

O 

< 

O 
U 

12; 
<i 
p^ 

l^" 
O 

X 

< 

in 

a3 



w o 

cfl b 

c 



» 



l-i 3 

j2« 



3 

" e c 



5> W CI, 



(3 



S2£ 

♦^ So *» 

» o 



r s ^ 



& 

opts 

S3 <i L 



§ 



Ov 



c« 

8 

H 



I* CO 



s . 


0,3.^ 


•J s" 


O-oPh 


z >: e» 


S Wrt 


Franco 
Con 

lO 


Henry 

m. A 

of Willi 




o " 



' — ' ci 



"A 
c« 

4/ - 



a 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



525 



< 
& 

o 

»-> 

< 



a 



•T3 

o.S . 

is c I- 
<; 5 o 

o 



8^ 



, + 



O 



B q 



O »*-i ^ 



J? 






• ^ 






tn" 






be 

s 

3 

o 



4> 

O 



u 

a 



.2- >^ 



3 3 a 



" 1 



3 S 
(A 



73 y!) ^ 



c4 

o 



O t-t^ 

a I c 6 



c 

3 
3 

pa 




P3 






S3 

S o 
II 

-a 



X 






At 



p4 



> . 

I— 1 00 

- "> I 

o 



>?5 



4) 

_ • I 



u 



VO 



. V f . 



rt 00 



c3 M 



•2 M- 
3^ 



5! 



ro 



I 

D 

O 3 
V 

M£! 

s s 

O u 

as 

c 

Q— ' 



at 
3^ 

OWM 

va 



3 *-■ — • 



•12 

•a 
a 

3 
o 



M 

•T^ lU " «> 









3 



3* — '« — ■" 



•O 3 



W 



s 
_^3 



a 

'- Co 

i 



526 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



W 
o 

in 
D 

o 
u 

o 

H 

:^ 
o 
Pi 

a. 

^ 

^q 
o 

o 

o 



X 



•S «« 



J3 M 

V I 



cQ 



c- 
o 
O 



M I** w 

" II T 



►-^ .2. 



o 



^ 


« 




tx 


rt 


C« 


1 


M 





N 


U 




V4-1 


^ 





M 




d 


V 


et 




G 


Q 


^ 


0- 




•0 


VM 


u 





ea 




J3 


bo 


.y 


a 



fii'a 



S H H 



PQ 



^ 




^ OS 
k to?* 



1\ . 
«<1 



3 



— . ^— > ■ 



2 ^ 
* a 

o 

B 
O 



> ^ 

O H 



2 g 

fa •* 

Z. X 
o 



J< 00 

-5 o « 



00 









f*), 



Ph 












-OS "§ 

roTs g 



.1 

> ? 



.a *» 



« ^^-5 



12 











i-i 


b rt 


c4 


W^ 


H 


S 


S* 




•o 




9 




H 




3 


.§ 


•0 




H 


tij3 









.taH U 




S rt 




feS 








Set O 

^'S 3 

o o § 

c 



.5 p 

^Z ^ 



c 



.2 

Is 

!-• 

O 
V 



u 
C 
u 



•O 

c 
si 

G 

3 
c« 

o 

o 

a 

o 



a 
e 

V 

•o 



>» ^ 

s s 

)-)>• c 

o O o 
V u ^ 

2 2 « 



H 
I- 

o 

2 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES 



527 






in 


^ M 


w 









< 







►— 1 


O* c 


a 


^ 
^ 


11 1 



to 
2 


< 


CC 


< 


"^ 


i « 


'o 


ffi 




l-H 


t<:h 


^ 


!? 

S 






^ 


2 




6 






p^ 






p 






m 






tn 






Ph 






< 






W 






Q 






;z; 






< 




— 


;z; 






< 






1— 1 






Q 


2 




^ 






D 


s^JJ 







•o-S 




P^ 




p 






;:q 


3 rt 

CO J3 




6 


0«M 




p:5 


>.° 






^•1 


•i 


C/2 


(4 a 


[1 


< 


ft f' 


.■< 


w 


a 


I'S 




II - 


' u 


» 


_c 


n 


? 


'2 

t-4 


1 


1^ 


CO M 





O.XI 

CO 



INDEX 



Aachen, see Aix-la-Chapelle. 

Aarhaus, bishopric, i86. 

Abbas, uncle of Mohammed, 270. 

Abbassides, 270. 

Abbots, 68, 70, 71, 79, 80, 85, 98, 127, 

177, 178, 179, 206, 208, 226, 231, 246, 

278, 417, 421. 
Abd-er-Rahman of Cordova, 271. 
Abd-er-Rahman III, caliph of Cordova, 

271. 
Abelard, 329, 477. 
Abraham, 257, 258, 259. 
Abu-Bekr, caliph, 270. 
Abyssinia, 254, 256. 
Acre, 297, 298, 303. 
Adalbert of Prague, missionary to the 

Poles, 190. 
Adalbert, archbishop of Bremen-Ham- 
burg, 199. 
Adelaide of Burgundy, wife of Otto I, 

106. 
Adrian I, pope, 84, 91, 153 n., 159, 160. 
Adrian IV, pope, 224-228. 
Adriatic Sea, 35, 53, 277, 286, 287, 299. 
^gidius, 62. 
yEneid, 32. 
Africa, 10, 34, 37, 43, loi, 145, 255, 256, 

268, 271, 302, 321, 504. 
Agincourt, battle of, 384. 
Agnes, mother of Henry IV, 197, 199. 
Agriculture, 4, 444; in Roman empire, 

is; among the Germans, 25, 69; in 

the ieudal system, 128-130; services 

of monks in, 176; in the fourteenth 

century, 376. 
Aides, 389. 
Aistulf, king of the Lombards, 81, 83, 

156, 157- 
Aix-la-Chapelle, 61, 98,' 99, 184, 491. 
Alamanni, 24, 38, 41, 63, 64, 66, 77, 80, 

118, 485. 
Alamannia, duchy of, 76. 
Alaric, 22, 35-37, 151 n. 
Alberic, 106. 

Albigensian crusade, 317, 318. 
Albigensians, 243, 317. 
Alboin, king of the Lombards, 81. 
Alchemy, 273. 



Alcuin, 89, 336, 471, 473. 
Alenfon, duke of, 391, 392 n., 393. 
Alexander the Great, 486. 
Alexander III, pope, 162, 228-230, 403, 

448. 
Alexander V, pope, 408, 
Alexander VI, pope, 412. 
Alexandria, 45, 141, 471, 472; church of, 

140. 
Alexius I, Greek emperor, 277, 284-290. 
Alexius III, Greek emperor, 234, 299. 
Alexius IV, Alexius Angelus, 235, 299, 

300. 
Alfonso, king of Castile, 430. 
Alfonsoof Castile, king of Germany, 418. 
Alfred the Great, 337, 338, 340, 343, 

352. 
Algebra, 274, 474. 
Ali, caliph, 270. 

Ali, son-in-law of Mohammed, 269. 
Allah, 255, 258, 259, 264. 
Allegiance, 118, 125, 127. 
Alps, 2-4, 85, 104, 211, 224, 241, 310, 

326; passes, 5, 446. 
Alsace, 76, 394, 396. 
Altheim, council at, 115, 182. 
Amalasuntha, 52. 
America, discovery and exploration of, 

447, 449, 504. _ 
Anaclete II, anti-pope, 164, 217. 
Anagni, 405. 

Anastasius I, emperor, 50, 51, 69. 
Andrew, king of Hungary, 302. 
Angevins, 353 n. 
Angles, 24, 42, 146. 

Angles and Saxons, 331, 332, 483, 485. 
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 340. 
Anglo-Saxon language and literature, 

338, 339, 340, 347, 379, 485- 

Anjou, county of, no, in, 311, 312, 

314-316, 322, 353 and n., 358; count 

of, 312, 3x4, 315; duke of, 391, 392 n. 

Anno, archbishop of Cologne, 199. 

Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, 347, 

351, 476. 
Anthemius of Tralles, 56. 
Antioch, 141, 289-291; church of, 140. 
Antrustiones, 97. 



529 



530 



INDEX 



Apostles, 140-144. 

Apostolic principle, 140. 

Appanage, 322, 391. 

Apulia, 193, 194 n. 

Aqueducts, 40. 

Aquileia, 142. 

Aquitaine, duchy of, 76, 77, 80, 83, 87, 
102, 109-111, 312, 314, 315, 320, 
353, 360 n., 372, 373, 382, 487 n. 

Arabia, Arabs, 59, 253-274, 505. 

Arabian Nights, 254, 273. 

Arabic numerals, 474. 

Aragon, 430, 431. 

Arcadius, emperor, 20, 47-49. 

Archbishops, 127, 141-144, 186, 191, 
243, 278, 336, 3S8, 457, 458- 

Archers, at Crecy, 371. 

Architecture: Byzantine, 56, 491; 
Gothic, 135, 327, 328, 348, 492-494; 
Mohammedan, 273; I^orman, 348; 
Romanesque, 348, 491, 492; of cities, 
440, 441, 50 1; 502; Renaissance, 500, 
501. 

Arduin, 193. 

Arian creed, 45-48, 64. 

Aristotle, in mediaeval learning, 166, 
323, 329, 330, 347, 474-478, 500; in 
Mohammedan learning, 273, 306. 

Arithmetic, 470-474. 

Arius, 45. 

Aries, kingdom of, see Burgundy, king- 
dom of. 

Armagnac, county of, 391. 

Armagnac party, 384, 385. 

Armenia, 235, 268, 289, 291, 293, 299. 

Armor, 135, 505. 

Arms, of the feudal warrior, 135. 

Arnold of Brescia, 219. 

Arnoldists, 243. 

Arnulf, bishop of Metz, 73. 

Arnulf, king of the East Franks, em- 
peror, 106, 112, 113. 

Arnulf, duke of Bavaria, 114, 

Arthur, King (legendary), 137, 346, 486, 
488. 

Arthur of Brittany, 316. 

Artillery, 505. 

Artois, county of, 322, 391. 

Ascalon, 293. 

Asceticism, 165-173. 

Asia, 3, 6, 10, 28, 276, 428, 433, 446, 

503, 505- 
Asia Minor, 17, 21, 34, 56, 268, 276, 

277, 294, 296, 297, 446. 
Astrolabe, 503. 



Astrology, 473. 

Astronomy, 274, 470, 471. 

Asturias, kingdom of, 88. 

Athanasian creed, 45. 

Athanasius, 45. 

Athaulf, 36. 

Athens, 471. 

Athlith, 303. 

Attila, 39, 151 n., 328. 

Augustine, bishop of Hippo, see St. 

Augustine. 
Augustine, missionary to England, 146, 

178, 334- 
Augustus (Octavian), 11; title, 15, 67. 
Aurelian, 21. 
Austrasia, 72-74. 

Austria, 36, 187, 395, 416, 419, 427. 
Austria-Hungary, empire of, 419. 
Avars, 55, 67, 88. 
Aversa, 193. 
Avignon, 325, 405-407. 



Babylonian Captivity, 379, 405-407. 

Badr, battle of, 260. 

Bagdad, 270, 271, 294. 

Baikal, Lake, 433. 

Bailli, 318. 

Balaam, 263 n. 

Balboa, 504. 

Baldwin, emperor of Constantinople, 

327. 

Baldwin I, king of Jerusalem, 286-289, 
291. 

Baldwin II, king of Jerusalem, 286. 

Balearic Islands, 88. 

Balkan mountains, 2. 

Balkan peninsula, 2, 26, 32, 35, 54, 59, 
234, 277, 429. 

Balkan states, 2, 419. 

Baltic Sea, 5, 7, 8, 191, 421, 422, 427, 
446, 447. 

Ban, royal, 69. 

Bannockburn, battle of, 364, 365, 365 n. 

Baptism, 242, 459. 

Bari, 285. 

Baron, 122, 314, 437; barons of Eng- 
land, 346, 349, 352, 357-361, 382. 

Basil the Great, rule of, 174. 

Basques, 67, 87. 

Bauto, 47. 

Bavaria, 36, 41, 66, 76, 83, 88, 102; 
duchy of, 114, 182, 184, 199, 200, 416. 

Bavarians, 24, 41, 77, 78, 80, 118, 485. 

Beaucaire, 450. 



INDEX 



531 



Becket, Thomas, archbishop of Canter- 
bury, 128, 354, 355, 355 n. 

Bede, 335, 336, 338, 340. 

Bedford, duke of, 385, 387, 398. 

Beirut, 303. 

Belgium, 6, 311. 

BeUsarius, 52, 53. 

Benedict IX, pope, 195. 

Benedict XI, pope, 325. 

Benedict XV, pope, 139, 

Benedictine monks, see Monks. 

Benedictine Rule, see Rule of St. Bene- 
dict. 

Beneficia, 226, 227. 

Benevento, duchy of, 81-85, 155 n., 
156, 188, 194 n. 

Beowulf, 340. 

Berengar, marquis of Friuli, king of 
Italy, 106, 107, 112, 187, 188. 

Bernard of Clairvaux, 217, 295, 296. 

Bernese Alps, 38. 

Berry, duke of, 393. 

Bertrand du Guesclin, 370. 

Besanfon episode, 226, 227. 

Bethlehem, 275, 302. 

Bible; Wyclif's translation, 380; study 
of, by humanists, 500; printed, 507. 

Bishop, 65, 68, 70, 71, 79, 80, 86, 98, 
127, 139-142, 149, 150, 186, 190, 201, 
204, 206-209, 214, 216, 219, 220, 226, 
231, 243-246, 417, 421, 457, 459, 467; 
as count, 85, 108, 437. 

Bishop of Rome, 139-144, 150, 335, 406; 
see also Papacy, Pope. 

Black Death, the, 371, 376, 377. 

Black Prince, Edward, son of Edward 
III, 370, 371, 373. 

Black Sea, 7, 24, 300, 427, 446. 

Blanche of Castile, mother of Louis IX, 
320. 

Blois, county of, iii. 

Boethius, 41, 338. 

Bogomiles, 243. 

Bohemia, 3, 41, 42, 187, 191, 237, 409, 
410, 419, 425, 426; king of (elector), 
420. 

Bohemians, 26, 183, 184, 186, 425, 426. 

Bohemond of Tarento, 286-293, 430. 

Bologna, 58; university of, 222, 228, 
480. 

Boniface, missionary to the Germans, 
78, 81, 146, 147, 178. 

Boniface of Montferrat, 300. 

Boniface VIII, pope, 324, 325, 363, 404, 
405- 



Bonn, 61. 

Bordeaux, 371, 382, 387. 

Borough, 361. 

Boso, count of Vienna, king of Lower 

Burgundy, 109. 
Bosporus, 277, 284, 300. 
Bosworth, battle of, 401. 
Bourbon, duke of, 391, 392 n., 393. 
Bourgeois, 328. 

Bouvines, battle of, 241, 241 n. 
Brabant, duchy of, 326. 
Brandenburg, 5; archbishop of, 187; 

margrave of (elector), 304, 420, 421; 

mark of, 423. 
Bremen, 187 n.; bishopric, 86. 
Brescia, 53. 

Bretigny, treaty of, 372, 373. 
Bretons, 67. 
Bridges, 452, 453. 
Brindisi, 302. 
Britain, Britons, British, 23, 24, 42, loi, 

146, 331, 332, 334, 344. 
Brittany, duchy of, 76, 109, 311, 312, 

391, 397, 488. 
Bruges, 369. 
Brunhilda, 72, 73; in Nibelungenlied, 

488. 
Bulgaria, Bulgarians, 26, 54, 284, 429, 

433- 

Buraburg, 147. 

Bur chard, duke of Suabia, 182. 

Burgesses, 361. 

Burgomaster, 421, 439. 

Burgrave, 423, 436. 

Burgundian party, 384, 385. 

Burgundians, 24, 37, 38, 40, 42, 62, 65, 
66, 118, 14s, 310, 331, 485. 

Burgundy, Prankish, 72-74; kingdom 
of, 105, 109, 187, 192, 310, 396; duchy 
of, no, 311, 312, 391, 393, 394, 395; 
duke of, 312, 384, 385, 387, 391, 393- 
395 ; Free County of, see Franche 
Comte. 

Byzantine architecture, see Architec- 
ture. 

Byzantine empire, see Greek empire. 

Byzantium, 23. 

Caaba, 255, 257. 

Caesar, Julius, 24, 326, 486; title of 

Roman emperor, 16, 17. 
Caesarea, 141, 289; church of, 140. 
Cahors, 453. 
Cairo, 271. 
Calabria, 40, 155, 193. 



532- 



INDEX 



Calais, 369, 370, 371, 372, 373, 382, 384, 
387; treaty of, see Br6tigny. 

Calcutta, 504. 

Caliph, caliphate, 270, 271. 

Calixtus II, pope, 215. 

Calmar, union of, 429. 

Calvin, John, 379. 

Canon law, 148 n. 

Canonical election, 97, 127, 195, 203, 
20s, 215. 

Canons (clergy), 8. 

Canossa, 211. 

Canterbury, 146; archbishopric of, 336. 

Canterbury Tales, 355, 454. 

Cantons, Swiss, 3, 423. 

Cape of Good Hope, 504. 

Cape St. Vincent, 504. 

Capetians, 58, 313-330- 

Capua, 188. 

Caracalla, emperor, 13, 44. 

Caravans, 254, 255. 

Cardinals, 196 n., 217, 225, 228, 250, 
407, 408, 410. 

Carinthia, mark of, 187, 419. 

Carmelites, 180. 

Carolingians (Karlings), 77-98, 122, 
309-312. 

Carpathian Mountains, 3. 

Carthage, 43. 

Carthusian order, 180. 

Caspian Sea, 8, 39, 446. 

Cassiodorus, 470. 

Castile, 430, 431. 

Castillon, battle of, 387. 

Castle, 124, 132-135, 310, 3i4» 345. 348, 
496, 505- 

Catalaunian fields, 39. 

Catalonia, 430. 

Cathari, 243. 

Cathedrals, 492-495; Notre Dame of 
Paris, 328, 329; chapter, 180; school, 
245, 329, 467, 474, 480, 481. 

Caucasus Mountains, 3, 446. 

Cavalry, in the feudal age, 121, 122, 
135, 184; in crusades, 305, 

Celibacy of the clergy, 179, 203, 204. 

Celtic church, 334 and n., 335. 

Celtic language, 24 n. 

Celts, 23, 24, 104, 311, 488. 

Chaifa, 303. 

Chamberlain, 75, 184. 

Chamhre des Comptes, chamber of ac- 
counts, 320, 327. 

Champagne, county of, iii, 311, 312, 
322, 



Chancellor, of England, 354; of cathe- 
dral, 481. 

Chandos, Sir John, 370. 

Channel Islands, 387. 

Chanson de Roland, 486. 

Chansons de geste, 486, 487. 

Charlemagne, ancestors of, 73; reign 
of, 83-99; empire of, 117, 118, 308, 
309, 331, 437; and papacy, 158, 160, 
163; in poetry, 346, 486, 487; estates 
of, 442, 443; interest in education, 
471, 472; church of Aix-la-Chapelle, 
49T. 

Charles Martel, 77-80, 156, 268. 

Charles the Bald, emperor, 102-104, 108, 
109, 309. 

Charles the Simple, king of the West 
Franks, 109-111. 

Charles IV, emperor, 420. 

Charles V, emperor, 395. 

Charles IV, king of France, 322, 368. 

Charles V (Charles the Wise), king of 
France, 372, 373. 

Charles VI, king of France, 383-385. 

Charles VII, king of France, 386-392. 

Charles VIII, king of France, 397, 432. 

Charles, son of Emperor Lothar, 105. 

Charles of Anjou, king of Sicily, 250, 
251, 303, 321 n., 414, 431. 

Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy, 

393-395, 424- 

Charter of Liberties, 351, 357, 359, 

Charters, city, 131. 

Chartres, county of, in. 

Chaucer, Geoff roy, 379, 453, 454. 

Chemistry, among Mohammedans, 273. 

Childebert, son of Grimoald, 74. 

Childerich I, king of the Franks, 62. 

Children's Crusade, 301, 302. 

Chilperich, king of the Franks, 72. 

China, 58, 268, 433, 446, 449, 505, 506. 

Chinese inventions, 504-506. 

Chinon, 386. 

Chioggia, battle of, 432, 433. 

Chivalry, 136. 

Chlodio, king of the Franks, 62. 

Chlodovech (Clovis), king of the Franks, 
40, 62-66, 69, 70, 117, 145. 

Chlothar I, king of the Franks, 65. 

Chlothar II, king of the Franks, 73. 

Christian of Troyes, 488. 

Christianity, in Roman Empire, 27-33; 
among the Germans, 44-46; among 
the Franks, 63-65, 86, 145-147; in 
England, 146, 334-337; among the 



INDEX 



533 



Hungarians, igi; and Mohammedan- 
ism, 255, 257, 262, 267. 

Christmas, 489. 

Chrodegang, bishop of Metz, 180. 

Chronicles, 468. 

Chrysoloras, 499, 

Church, early, 27-33; in the feudal sys- 
tem, 126-128; as civilizing force, 457- 
482. 

Church of St. Peter (Rome), 92, 189. 

Church of St. Sophia, 56. 

Chxirch of the Holy Sepulchre, 292. 

Cicero, 323, 470, 474, 498, 500. 

Cilicia, 291. 

Circuit judges (in England), 354. 

Cistercian order, 180. 

Cities, 5, 435-455, 496, 497; on rivers, 
7; Roman, 12, 15, 18, 435; growth of, 
130; government of, 439; in Flanders, 
369; in France, 319, 440; of Ger- 
many, 421-423, 440; in Italy, 431- 

433, 439- 

Clement V, pope, 325. 

Clement VII, anti-pope, 407, 408. 

Clergy, 31, 64, 70, 73, 78, 98, 126-128, 
141, 142, 147, 148, 179-181, 196, 198, 
203-208, 214, 219, 244, 24s, 324, 325, 
339, 351, 358, 359, 360, 361, 363, 380, 
404, 406. 

Clericis Laicos, 325, 363, 404. 

Clermont, council at, 278, 282. 

Climate, importance in history, 8. 

Cloister and the Hearth, The (Charles 
Reade), 455 n. 

Clovis, see Chlodovech. 

Cluniac reforms, Cluny, 178-180, 195, 
203-205, 280, 350, 492. 

Cnut, king of the English, 340. 

Coblenz, 414. 

Codex of Justinian, 57. 

Coelestine III, pope, 234. 

Coinage, right of, 11, 67, 68, 160, 186, 
416; and see Crown rights. 

Cologne, 61, 199, 241, 283, 302, 437, 
438; archbishop of, 184, 438; elec- 
tor, 420. 

Coloni, 12, 14, 17, 42, 435, 445. 

Columbus, 449, 504. 

Comitatus, 26. 

Commerce, 130, 319, 445-450; of Con- 
stantinople, 60; of the Rhine, 241 n.; 
of the Arabians, 254; of the Moham- 
medan empire, 273; as result of the 
crusades, 294, 295, 304, 305; of the 



Flemish towns, 369; of Venice and 
Genoa, 294, 43i-433i Jews in, 447. 

Common Pleas, court of, 354. 

Compass, 503-505- 

Compiegne, 386. 

Compurgators, 44. 

Conciliar epoch, 408-411. 

Conclave, papal, 407. 

Concordat of Worms, 215, 216. 

Confirmation, 459. 

Conrad I, king of Germany, 114, 115, 
182, 183. 

Conrad II, emperor, 189 n., 192, 193. 

Conrad III, emperor, 217-221, 222; on 
second crusade, 296. 

Conrad IV, king of Germany, 250. 

Conrad, son of Henry IV, 213. 

Conradino, son of Conrad IV, 250, 251. 

Consolations of Philosophy (Boethius)> 
41, 338. 

Constance, council of, see Council of 
Constance. 

Constance, peace of (1183), 230. 

Constance, treaty of (1153), 224, 225. 

Constance of Sicily, 231, 232, 238. 

Constans II, emperor, 149 n. 

Constantine, 20, 30, 31, 149, 206; and 
see Donation of Constantine. 

Constantinople, 20, 23, 47-49, 50-60, 
93, 94, 143, 234, 246, 268, 277, 278, 
284, 297, 299-301, 306, 307, 427, 428, 
429, 446, 447, 491. 

Constantius, 17. 

Consuls, of Italian cities, 230; commer- 
cial agents, 295. 

Cordova, 271; caliphate of, 430; uni- 
versity of, 472, 

Corinth, church of, 140. 

Cornwall, 7, 332. 

Coronation, of Pippin, 81; of Charle- 
magne, 92, 93, 100; of Ludwig the 
Pious, 98; of Otto the Great as king, 
184; as emperor, 188; of Frederick 
Barbarossa, 225; of Otto IV, 240; of 
Charles VII of France, 386. 

Corpus juris civilis, 57, 58, 323. 

Corsica, 88, 229. 

Cortenuova, battle of, 249. 

Cortes (explorer), 504. 

Coucy, castle of, 134, 135. 

Council, general or ecvmienical, 143 n., 
406; in fifteenth century, 408-411. 

Council of Basel (1431), 410, 411. 

Council of Chalcedon (451), 144. 



534 



INDEX 



Council of Constance (1414), 408-410, 
426. 

Council of Constantinople (381), 144; 
(553), 57; (680), 143 n.; (692), 153 n. 

Council of Nicaea (325), 31, 57; (787), 
160. 

Council of Pisa (1409), 408. 

Council of Toulouse (1229), 243. 

Coimcil of Trent (1545), 411. 

Count, Roman, 17; Frankish, 70, 95, 
96, 119, 120; feudal, 1 21-123, 126, 
127. 

Count of Paris (Capetian line), 109, 309, 
326. 

Count Palatine, Frankish, 75; German, 
185. 

Count Palatine of the Rhine, elector, 
420. 

County, tribal division, 25. 

Courts, 464-466; tribal, 44; manorial, 
119, 124, 129; feudal, 125, 316; Eng- 
lish royal, 354; church, 355, 380. 

Crecy, battle of, 370, 37 1. 384- 

Crema, 229. 

Crescentius, 195. 

Crimen maiestatis (treason), 13, 28. 

Croatia, 433. 

Cross of thorns (relic), 327. 

Crown land, of the king of France, 311- 
316, 318. 

Crown rights, sovereign powers, regalia, 
68, 182, 185, 215, 229, 313, 324, 416. 

Crozier, 215, 

Crusades, 275-307, 404, 461, 502; first, 
351, 487; second, 314; fourth, 428; 
of Conrad III, 217; of Richard Lion- 
heart, 314; of Frederick Barbarossa, 
232; of Henry VI, 234; Innocent III 
and the, 245; of Louis IX, 321. 

Culture, of Middle Age, 456-494; of 
feudal society, 132-137; and see Mo- 
hammedan civilization. 

Cup-bearer, 75, 184. 

Curiales, 18. 

Cynicism (philosophy), 166. 

Cyprus, 235, 299. 

Dagobert, king of the Franks, 73, 74. 

Dalmatia, 40, 433. 

Damascus, 270, 296, 305. 

Damietta, 302. 

Danegeld, 344. 

Danes, 42, 186, 337, 338, 340, 344- 



Dante, 498. 



Danube River, 2, 3, 7, 21, 34, 35, 37, 

39, 88, 277, 332, 433, 446. 
Dauphin, title, 371, 384, 386. 
Dauphine, county of, 326, 396. 
David Bruce, king of Scotland, 368. 
Decius, emperor, 30. 
Defensor Pads, 406. 
Defensor es, 19. 
Denmark, 24, 42, 237, 332, 423, 429, 

430. 
Desiderius, king of the Lombards, 83- 

85, 158. 
Dictatus pap(B, 201, 202. 
Diet, Frankish, 69, 73, 80, 88, 98; im- 
perial, 215, 216, 416, 417, 419; of 

Roncaglia, 228, 229; of Coblenz, 414. 
Digest, of Justinian, 58. 
Diocese, of Roman empire, 16, 141; of 

the church, 139, 140, 180, 201, 207, 

243, 245, 457. 
Diocletian, emperor, 13; reforms of, 

15-20, 21; persecutions under, 30, 141. 
Divine Comedy, The, 498. 
Dnieper River, 7, 8, 427, 446. 
Dniester River, 7. 
Domesday Book, 346 n., 349. 
Dominicans, 243, 244, 329, 461-463, 

477, 478, 479; and see St. Dominic. 
Don River, 7. 

Donation of Constantine, 161 n., 162. 
Donation of Pippin, 82-85, 158. 
Donjon, 133-135- 
Do-nothing kings, 74, 163. 
Douro River, 431. 
Drave River, 187. 
Drogo, 193 and n. 

Duchies, German, 114, 115, 182-185. 
Dukes, Roman, 17; Frankish, 70, 96; 

of Germany, 114, 115, 182-185, 4^7 J 

feudal, 122, 126, 127. 
Duna River, 7. 
Durazzo, 285, 286. 
Dutch language, 485. 
Dyle, battle of the, 112. 

Earl, English, 341, 349. 

East Anglia, 332, 333, 337, 343. 

East Goths, 24, 35, 36, 39-41, 43, 52, 53> 

66, 145, 151 n. 
East Indies, 446, 449, 504. 
East mark, 187. 
Easter, 473, 489. 
Ebionites, 171. 
Ebro River, 87, 88. 
Ebroin, 74-76. f 



INDEX 



535 



Ecbert of Brunswick, igg. 

Ecuyer, 135. 

Edessa, 289, 291, 293, 295. 

Edgar, king of the English, 338. 

Edgar the Child, 349. 

Edward, king of the English, 1 1 1 . 

Edward the Confessor, 341, 345, 352, 

357- 
Edward I, king of England, 325, 326, 

360, 361-365, 367, 379- 
Edward II, 365, 366. 
Edward III, 368-373, 377, 414, 415- 
Edward IV, 394, 399-401. 
Edward V, 401. 
Edward, prince of Wales, son of Henry 

VI, 399, 400. 
Edward, the Black Prince, 370, 371, 

373. 
Edward Balliol, 368. 
Edwin, king of Northumbria, 333. 
Egbert, king of Wessex, 334, 337. 
Egypt, 173, 254, 268, 271, 293, 302, 303, 

321. 
Einhard, 93, 98. 
Elbe River, 3, 7, 41, 421. 
Eleanor of Aquitaine, wife of Henry 11, 

314, 315, 353, 356. 

Election of Roman emperor, 14. 

Electors, the Seven, 415, 420. 

Emicho, 282. 

Emir, 262, 270, 271, 290, 296. 

Emperor, Roman, see Roman emperor. 

Empire, mediaeval, 182-252, 403. 

Encratites, 171. 

England, 6, 42, 123, 331-366; Anglo- 
Saxon, 331-344; imder Norman kings, 
344-352; vmder Angevin kings, 352- 
366; in Hundred Years' War, 367- 
373> 382-388; in fourteenth century, 
373-381; War of the Roses, 397-402; 
and the papacy, 237, 252, 405, 406, 
408; and the empire, 414, 415; hu- 
manism in, 500. 

English language, 331, 340, 345, 346, 

485. 
Enzio, son of Frederick 11, 249. 
Ephesus, 141; church of, 140. 
Epictetus, 12. 
Equestrian order, 18, 219. 
Erasmus, 500. 
Erfurt, bishopric, 147. 
Essen, 183, 
Essex, 332. 

Ethelbert, king of Kent, 333, 334. 
Ethelred the Redeless, 340, 341, 344. 



Etienne Marcel, 372. 

Eucharist, 459. 

Euclid, geometry of, 323, 347, 474. 

Eugene III, pope, 220, 223, 279 n. 

Euphrates River, 39, 289, 446. 

Exarch of Italy, 53, 152, 154. 

Exarchate of Ravenna, 81-84. 

Exchequer, 352, 353. 

Excommunication, 154, 206, 208, 355, 
408, 464; of Henry IV, 209-212; of 
Frederick II, 248-250; of Otto IV, 
240; of John of England, 358. 

Exploration and discovery, 502. 

Extreme unction, 460. 

Fairs, 443, 449, 450; in Arabia, 254; in 

Mohammedan empire, 273. 
Fatima, daughter of Mohammed, 27 1, 
Fatimites, 271. 
Ferdinand of Aragon, 431. 
FericB, 449. 
Fermo, 194 n. 
Ferries, 452. 
Feudal law, 124, 125. 
Feudalism, no, 116-138, 308, 339, 344, 

345, 349, 380, 403, 416, 437, 496, 506. 
Fief, 116 n., 125-127, 191, 193, 194 n-. 

208, 237, 281, 315, 322, 367, 391. 
Finns, 26, 27. 
Flanders, covmt of, 123, 312, 325, 369; 

county of, no, 311, 322, 372, 391, 

393- 

Flemish towns, 369. 

Florence, 431, 432, 439, 499. 

Florida, 504. 

Foix, county of, 391. 

Forest laws of William the Conqueror, 
351 n. 

Formosus, p>ope, 112. 

France, 5, 32; origins, 103, 108-111, 
122; growth of monarchy in, 308-330; 
and England, 241, 347, 352, 353, 356- 
358, 361, 364, 365; in the Himdred 
Years' War, 367-373, 382-388; in 
fifteenth century, 388-397; and papa- 
cy, 237, 404-407; and first crusade, 
277-280; and second crusade, 295; 
cities of, 440; humanism in, 500. 

Tranche Comte, 326, 391, 393, 395, 396. 

Francia, duchy of, no, in, 309, 311. 

Franciscans, 243, 329, 461-463; and see 
St. Francis. 

Franconia, 63; duchy of, 114, 182, 184. 

Franks, 22, 24, 36, 38, 40, 41, 53, 55, 



536 



INDEX 



61-76, 77-99, 118, 146, 268, 331, 343, 
485. 

Fredegonda, 72. 

Frederick Barbarossa, 58, 216, 222-232, 

308, 416, 417; on third crusade, 296, 

297. 
Frederick II, emperor, 235, 302, 321, 

326, 360, 414, 417. 
Frederick III, emperor, 394, 395. 
Frederick of Hohenzollern, 423. 
Free companies, 371, 372. 
French language, 310; and see Old 

French. 
Friars, 243, 329, 377, 454- 
Frisians, 77, 78, 95. i47- 
Friuli, mark of, 187. 
Froissart, Jean, 370. 
Fulcher, 282. 

Gabelle, 389. 

Gainas, 47-49. 

Gaiseric, king of the Vandals, 22, 37, 43. 

Galen, 273. 

Galerius, emperor, 17, 30. 

Galicia, 88. 

Gallia Placidia, 36. 

Galswintha, 72. 

Gandersheim, 183. 

Garonne River, 65, 312. 

Gascony, 76, no. 

Gau, 25. 

Gaul, 3, 36, 37, 309, 310, 326, 331; pre- 
fecture of, 17. 

Gefolge, 26, 43, 70, 97. 

Genghis Khan, 270, 433. 

Genoa, 294, 431-433, 449, 503. 

Geometry, 470-474. 

George, duke of Clarence, 401. 

Gepidae, 41, 55. 

Geraint and Enid, 488 n. 

German Order, 304, 421. 

Germanic languages, 483, 485. 

Germanic law, 44, 45. 

Germans, 3, 14, 24-26, 103, 485; in- 
vasions o^ 34-49, 117, 132. 

Germany, 3, 332; formation of, 103, 
iii-iiS, 122; and the empire, 164, 
182-198, 199-201, 208-217, 222-233, 
238-242, 246-251; and France, 310; 
and the papacy, 406; and Bohemia, 
425-427; cities of, 440; literature of, 
489; in later Middle Age, 414-424; 
humanism in, 500. 

Ghent, 369. 

Ghibelline, 238 n. 



Gibraltar, Straits of, 446. 

Giotto, 495. 

Gnesen, 190, 427. 

Gnosticism, 167-169, 242. 

Godfrey of Bouillon, Protector of the 

Holy Sepulchre, 286-294. 
Godwin, earl of Wessex, 341. 
Golden Bull, the, 420. 
Good Parliament, 375. 
Goslar, 183, 199. 
Gothic architecture, 135, 327, 328, 492- 

494. 
Gothic language, 46. 
Gottschalk, 282. 
Gran, archbishopric, 191. 
Granada, 271, 430, 431. 
Grand Conseil, 321. 
Grand jury, 354. 
Gratian, 31. 

Great Charter, the, see Magna Carta. 
Great Council of England, 360, 361, 362. 
Great Schism, 407-409. 
Greece, 272, 429; and see Greek empire. 
Greek church, 60, 140, 145, 147, 277, 

427. 
Greek emperor, Charlemagne and, 93, 

94; and poF>es, 159, 160; Otto I and, 

188, 189; and Italy, 220, 223, 224; 

Henry VI and, 234; and the crusades, 

276-278, 284-290, 296, 299. 
Greek empire, 23, 50-60, 234, 235, 300, 

301, 306, 307, 428, 429, 430, 432, 433. 
Greek language and Uterature, in Re- 
naissance, 499. 
Greek monasticism, 174, 177. 
Greeks in southern Italy, 188, 189, 192- 

194. 
Greenland, 430. 
Gregory I (the Great), pope, 145, 146, 

178, 334, 338. 
Gregory II, pope, 91, 154, 155 n., 156. 
Gregory III, pope, 154, 156. 
Gregory VI, pope, 195. 
Gregory VII, pope, 147, 162, 164, 179, 

196, 201-213, 277, 350, 363, 403. 
Gregory IX, pope, 243, 248-250. 
Gregory XI, pope, 407. 
Gregory of Tours' History of the Franks, 

64, 65. 
Grimoald, 74. 
Guelf party, 238, 239. 
Guido, duke of Spoleto, 105, 106, 113. 
Guienne, duchy of, 320, 325, 326, 360 n., 

369- 
Guinevere, 488 n. 



INDEX 



537 



Guilds, 130, 439, 450, 452. 
Gunpowder, 505. 
Gustavus Vasa, 429. 
Gutenberg, John, 506, 507. 

Hadrian, Roman emperor, 16, 275. 

Hainault, county of, 326. 

Halberstadt, bishopric, 86. 

Hambvurg, 422, 440; archbishopric, 187. 

Hanseatic league, 422, 448. 

Hapsburg family, 394, 395, 414, 415, 

418, 424, 425, 428. 
Harflexir, 384. 

Harold, king of the English, 341, 349. 
Haroun-al-Raschid, 270. 
Harz Mountains, 66, 200. 
Harzburg, 200. 

Hastings, battle of, 341, 344, 348. 
Havelberg, bishopric, 187. 
Hegira, 256. 

Helena, mother of Constantine, 275. 
Henricians, 243. 
Henry I, king of Germany, 115, 122, 

182-184. 
Henry H, emperor, 189 n., 192, 195. 
Henry HI, emperor, 189 n., 193-198. 
Henry IV, emperor, 189 n., 194 n., 197, 

199-214, 277, 350. 
Henry V, emperor, 213-216. 
Henry VI, emperor, 231-235, 298, 299, 

316. 
Henry I, king of England, 351, 352, 354, 

357. 
Henry H, king of England, 128, 314, 

316, 353-357, 367, 379- 

Henry HI, king of England, 320, 321, 
360, 361, 367. 

Henry IV, king of England, 374, 375, 
382, 383. 

Henry V, king of England, 383-385. 

Henry VI, king of England, 385, 397- 
401. 

Henry VII, king of England, 401. 

Henry I, king of France, 313. 

Henry (VII), son of Frederick II, 247. 

Henry "Ja-so-mir-Gott," duke of Aus- 
tria, 416. 

Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony, 239. 

Henry the Navigator, prince of Portu- 
gal, 503, 504. 

Henry Raspe, anti-king of Germany, 
250. 

Heraclea, 141, 288, 289. 

Heraldry, 136. 



Heresy, 32, 55, 160, 242-244, 404, 460, 
463; Albigensian, 317; of Wyclif, 
380, 460; of Huss, 409, 425, 426, 460. 

Hermits, 170-174. 

Hide, 25. 

Hildebrand (Pope Gregory VII), 196. 

Hippocrates, 273. 

Hohenstaufen, 217, 222 n., 238 n., 239, 
321 n., 432. 

Hohenzollern family, 415, 421, 423. 

Holland, 6, 423, 485. 

Holstein, mark of, 186. 

Holy Grail, the, 488, 489. 

Holy lance, the, 291. 

Holy Land, 275; routes to, 8; and see 
Crusades, Palestine. 

Holy Roman Empire, see Empire, medi- 
aeval. 

Holy Sepulchre, 278, 292, 293. 

Homage, 125, 127, 182, 194, 221, 227, 

2^3, 315, 353- 
Homer, 499. 

Honorius, emperor, 20, 35-37. 
Honorius III, pope, 247. 
Horace, 323. 
Hospitalers (Knights of St. John), 303, 

304. 
Hotel de Ville, Paris, 328. 
House of Commons, 362. 
House of Lords, 362. 
Eufe, 25. 
Hugh Capet, duke of Francia, king of 

France, in, 122, 187, 309, 311, 313, 

327. 

Hugo, coxmt of Vermandois, 285, 286. 

Hugo, duke of Francia, in. 

Humanism, humanists, 497-501. 

Humanities, 497. 

Hmnber River, 333. 

Hundred (tribal division), 25; in Eng- 
land, 333, 339, 346. 

Hundred-court, 25, 120, 333, 339, 342, 
343. 

Hundred Years' War, 322, 326, 367-388, 
406. 

Hungarian language, 27 n. 

Hungarians, 3, 27, 121, 164, 183, 184, 
186, 187, 190, 191, 428. 

Hungary, 36, 284, 302, 419, 428, 429, 
433. 

Huns, 26, 35, 39, 49, 55, 328. 

Huss, John, 409, 425, 426, 

Hussites, 426. 

Hypatius, emperor, 51. 



S38 



INDEX 



Iceland, 430. 

Iconium, 288. 

Illyricum, 35, 36; prefecture of, 17. 

Image controversy, 154. 

Imitation of Christ, 461. 

Immunity, grants of, 119. 

Impeachments by Parliament, 375. 

Incarnation, 475. 

India, 255, 268, 272, 446, 449, 504. 

Indian Ocean, 446. 

Indiction, 19. 

Indo-European languages, 27 n. 

Indulgences, of crusaders, 279 n.; sale 
of, 379, 410, 412. 

Industries, 4; in Roman cities, 435; in 
the manor, 128, 443; in towns, 130, 
442-445; in the castle, 137; in the 
monastery, 176; of Mohammedans, 
272; in Flemish towns, 369. 

Infallibility of the pope, 202, 411. 

Ingeborg, wife of Philip II, 237. 

Innocent II, pope, 164, 217, 218. 

Innocent III, pope, 162, 235, 403, 425; 
papacy of, 236-246; and the crusades, 
279 n,, 302, 447; and heresy, 317; 
and Philip Augustus, 237; and King 
John, 3S8, 359. 

Innocent IV, pope, 250. 

Innocent VIII, pope, 412. 

Inquisition, 243. 

Insignia, 38, 201, 202. 

Institutes of Justinian, 58. 

Interdict, 237, 358. 

Interregnum, 250, 417, 418. 

Inventions, 503-507. 

Investiture conflict, 128, 203-221. 

lolanthe, wife of Frederick II, 248. 

Ireland, 23, 334, 344, 356, 404, 430. 

Irene, empress, 94. 

Irene, wife of Philip of Suabia, 234, 300. 

Isaac, 258. 

Isaac Angelus, Greek emperor, 234, 299, 
300. 

Isabella of Castile, 431. 

Isabella, wife of Edward 11, 365, 366. 

Isaurians, 49. 

Ishmael, 258. 

Isidore of Seville, 470. 

Islam, 257, 258, 271; and see Moham- 
medanism. 

Istria, 82, 15s, 157. 

Italian cities, 222, 224, 233, 249, 250, 
294, 428, 431-433, 447-44Q- 

Italian language and literature, 484, 489, 
498. 



Italy, 2, 32, 331; prefecture of, 17, 38; 
diocese of, 38, 40; during the in- 
vasions, 35, 36, 38-41, 52, 5S; under 
the Lombards, 81-85; Mohammedans 
in, 104; under the Carolingians, 105- 
108, 113; and the popes, 154-160; 
Otto I in, 188, 189; Normans in, 193, 
194; Henry III in, 195; Henry IV 
in, 211; Frederick Barbarossa in, 
224, 225, 228-230; Henry VI in, 232, 
238; Frederick II in, 247-249; last 
Hohenstaufenin, 250, 251; humanism 
in, 498-500; and see Italian cities, 
Renaissance. 

Jagello, prince of Lithuania, 427. 

Jarrow, monastery, 336. 

Jeanne d'Arc (Joan of Arc), 386, 387 n. 

Jerusalem, 193, 275, 276-280, 289-299, 
302; honored by Mohammed, 257- 
259; church of, 140, 231; kingdom of, 
248, 292-294. 

Jews, 30, 282 n., 447; Mohammed and 
the, 245, 254, 257, 262, 265; persecu- 
tions of, 282, 296. 

John, king of England, 237, 239, 241, 
315, 316, 320, 353, 357-359, 367, 452. 

John VI, pope, 154 n. 

John XII, pope, 106, 107, 188. 

John XXII, pope, 406. 

John, king of France, 371, 372 n. 

John, duke of Burgundy, 384, 385. 

John of Cappadocia, 50. 

John of Gaunt, 373. 

John Balliol, king of Scotland, 364. 

Joinville, Sire de, 321. 

Judaism, 28, 254. 

Judith, wife of Ludwig the Pious, 102, 
103. 

Julian, pope, 143 n. 

Jury, trial by, 354, 359. 

Justin I, emperor, 50. 

Justinian, 37, 41, 50-60, 88, 149 n., 323. 

Jutes, 42, 146, 332. 

Karl the Fat, 109, 112. 

Karlings, see Carolingians. 

Karlman, son of Charles Martel, 80-82. 

Karlman, son of Pippin, 83, 84. 

Keep of the castle, 133, 134. 

Kent, 146, 332, 334- 

Khadijeh, wife of Mohammed, 255. 

Khan (title), 427. 

Kiev, 427. 

King's Bench, court of, 354. 



INDEX 



539 



Knight, 122, 135, 193, 285-289, 295, 
298, 299, 304, 370; of the^shire, 361. 
Knighting, 136. 
Knights of Malta, 304. 
Knights of St. John (Hospitalers), 303, 

304. 
Koran, 257-260, 263-267, 271-273, 276. 

Ladoga, Lake, 446. 

Lambert, son of Guido of Spoleto, 106, 

113- 
Lancastrian line, 374 n., 375, 394, 397- 

401. 
Lancelot, 488 n. 
Landgrave, 417. 
Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, 

347, 350- 

Langland, William, 377 n. 

Laodicea, 293. 

Lapps, 26, 27. 

Lateran council (1215), 243, 246. 

Latifundia, 14, 18, 435. 

Latin church, 277. 

Latin empire of Constantinople, 237,301. 

Latin language, 24 n., 32, 45, loi, 497, 
498 n. 

Latin law {ius Latii), 12. 

Latin literature in the Middle Age, 323, 
338; in Renaissance, 497-499. 

Latin Quarter, 329. 

Latin states (crusader states), 294. 

Lausitz, mark of, 187. 

Law, tribal, 44, 45, 333; in the feudal 
age, 124, 125, 343, 465; English com- 
mon law, 343; study of, in the uni- 
versities, 474, 479, 480; and see 
Roman law, courts. 

Learning in the monasteries, 177, 336, 
337, 347; and see Monastery schools. 

Lech River, 38, 187. 

Lechfeld, battle of, 187. 

Legates of the pope, 147, 196 n., 202, 
226, 242. 

Legnano, battle of, 230. 

Leipzig, 450. 

Leo I, emperor, 49. 

Leo III, emperor, 154, 

Leo I (the Great), pope, 144, 151 n. 

Leo III, pope, 91-93, 160. 

Leo VIII, pope, 188. 

Leo rX, pope, i93-i9S- 

Leo X, pope, 412. 

Leo, king of Armenia, 299. 

Libraries, 474. 

Limoges, 373. 



Lincoln, 482. 

Literature of the feudal age, 137. 

Lithuania, 426. 

Lithuanians, 26. 

Liudolf, duke of Saxony, 114. 

Liutprand, king of the Lombards, 155 n., 

156. 
Llewelyn, prince of Wales, 363, 364. 
Logic, 470-479. 

Loire River, 5, 7, 36, 63, 65, 311, 371. 
Lombard league, 230. 
Lombards, 24, 41, 55, 81-85, i4S, i52» 

154-159, 331, 485- 
Lombardy, 53, 81, 211. 
London, 378. 
London Bridge, 452, 453. 
Lords Appellant, 374. 
Lorraine (Lotharingia, Lothringen), 105, 

113, 114, 183, 326, 394, 396. 
Lothaire, king of France, in. 
Lothar, son of Ludwig the Pious, 102- 

108, 163. 
Lothar II, 105. 

Lothar III, 216, 220, 221, 222, 224. 
Louis, see also Ludwig. 
Louis IV, d'Outremer, in.' 
Louis V, III. 
Louis VI (Louis the Fat), king of France, 

313, 314, 352. 
Louis VII, 314; on the second crusade, 

295, 296. 
Louis VIII, 319. 
Louis IX, 251, 320-322, 324, 327, 360 n., 

367; crusades of, 302, 303. 
Louis X, 322. 
Louis XI, 391-397. 
Louis XII, 397. 
Loviis, duke of Orleans, 384. 
Liibeck, 422. 
Ludwig the Pious, 87, 98, 99, 102, 103, 

163. 
Ludwig II, 104, 105. 
Ludwig the German, 102-104, in, 112. 
Ludwig the Child, 113-115, 183. 
Ludwig rV (Ludwig of Bavaria), 406, 

414, 415- 
Luther, Martin, 379, 411, 413, 460, 500. 
Luxemburg, county of, 6, 326. 

Madeira Islands, 504. 

Magdeburg, archbishop of, 187, 427. 

Magellan, 504. 

Magna Carta, 351, 353, 357, 359, 360. 

Magnus, duke of Saxony, 199. 

Magyars (Hungarians), 114, 184, 428. 



540 



INDEX 



Main River, 7, 38. 

Maine, county of, 311. 

Mainz, 506, 507; archbishopric of, 147, 

184; archbishop of, elector, 420. 
Major domus, 73-76, 77-80. 
Mallorca, 88. 
Mallory, 488 n. 
Malta, 304. 

Mandeville, Sir John, 503. 
Manfred, son of Frederick. II, 250, 251, 

432. 
Manichseans, 242, 243. 
Manor, 116 n., 128-131, 313, 318. 
Manorial system, 116 n., 128-132, 339, 

376. 
March, earl of, 383 and n., 397. 
Marchfield, 68. 
Marcionists, 171. 
Marco Polo, 502, 503. 
Marcomanni, 41. 
Margaret of Anjou, wife of Henry VI, 

399, 400- 
Margaret, queen of Denmark, 429. 
Margrave, 186, 417. 
Mark of Hermann Billung, 187. 
Markets, 129, 186, 207, 230, 443, 447, 

449, 454; in Arabia, 254. 
Marks (Marches), German, 184, 186, 

187. 
Marriage, of the clergy, 179, 203, 204; 

sacrament of, 459. 
Marseilles, 301. 
Marshall, 75, 184. 
Marsilius of Padua, 406. 
Martin I, pope, 149 n. 
Mary of Burgundy, daughter of Charles 

the Bold, 395. 
Mass, 459. 

Masters (of universities), 481, 482. 
Mathematics, in monastic curriculum, 

470; among the Mohammedans, 273, 

274. 
Matilda, countess of Tuscany, 212; 

lands of, 213, 216, 220, 221, 231. 
Matilda, daughter of Henry I, 352, 353. 
Maximian, emperor, 17, 19. 
Maximilian, emperor, 395. 
Mayfield, 68. 

Mayor of the Palace, see Major domus. 
Mecca, 255-262, 266. 
Medici family, 432. 
Medicine, 474, 479. 
Medina, 256, 257, 260, 266. 
Mediterranean Sea, 7, 38, 305, 309. 326, 

446, 447, 503- 



Meersen, treaty of, 105. 
Meissen, mark of, 187. 
Melanchthon, 500. 
Mendicant orders, 461. 
Mercia, 332-334. 337- 
Merovingians, 62-76, 80, 334. 
Merseburg, 183; mark of, 187; bishop 

of, 187. 
Messina, 297. 

Metropolitan (archbishop), 141, 142. 
Metz, 66. 
Meuse River, 61. 
Mexico, 504. 
Middle High German language and 

literature, 485, 489. 
Migne, 461. 
Milan, 17, 22, 142, 229, 432, 439. 
Military-monkish orders, 304. 
Military service, in Frankish empire, 

67, 79, 96, 97; in the feudal system, 

121-126. 
Mines, rights over, 186. 
Ministerials, 200 n., 213. 
Minnesingers, 489. 
Minorca, 88. 
Minstrels, 340. 
Missi dominici, 96. 
Model Parliament, 324, 361, 364. 
Mcesia, 46. 1 

Mohammed, 253-267. j 

Mohammedan civilization, 272-274, 472, 

474- 

Mohammedans, 253-274, 446, 447, 448, 
506; in Spain, i, 37, 78, 79, 86-88, 
268, 271, 430, 431, 506; in the Medi- 
terranean, 102, 104, 192-194, 268; in 
the Holy Land (crusades), 275-307. 

Monasteries, 64, 79, 119, 183, 336, 442. 

Monastery of Luxueil, 79; of St. Denis, 
79; of St. Martin of Tours, 79, 471. 

Monastery schools, 336, 337, 347, 467" 
474. 

Monastidsm, see Monks. 

Money, use of, 131. 

Mongols, 427, 428, 433. 434- 

Monks, monastidsm, 1 65-181; as mis- 
sionaries and colonists, 89, 146, 186, 
190, 334-336, 421, 458; as architects, 
491, 492; and see Cluniac reforms. 
Monasteries, Monastery schools. Mili- 
tary-monkish orders. 

Montanists, 171. 

Monte Cassino, 175. 

Monterey, 385. 



INDEX 



541 



Moors, loi, 27211., 304 n., 431, 472; 

see Mohammedans in Spain. 
Moravia, 426. 
Moravian Brethren, 426. 
Morocco, 305. 
Mortimer family (earls of March), 383 

and n. 
Mosaics, 56. 

Moscow, prince of, 428, 434. 
Moselle River, 61. 
Mosques, 273. 
Mosul, emir of, 290. 
Moimtains, effects on history, 1-5; 

passes, 5. 
Muglia, 299. 
Miinster, bishopric, 86; bishop of, 438. 

Nancy, battle of, 394, 424. 

Naples, 152, 155, 43i, 432. 

Narses, 53. 

Nationality, 103, 308, 309, 313, 318, 

404. 
Navarre, 431. 
Nazareth, 302. 
Neo-Platonism, 165, 169. 
Neo-Pythagoreanism, 165. 
Nepi, 152. 
Netherlands, 241, 326, 391, 395, 396, 

485- 

Neustria, 72-74, 77. 

New Testament, 500. 

Nibdungenlied, 489. 

Nicaea, 284, 287, 288. 

Nicholas 11, pope, 164, 193-197. 

Nicholas, leader of the Children's Cru- 
sade, 302. 

Nicomedia, 17. 

Niemen River, 7. 

Nish, 284. 

Nobles, Prankish, 70-76, 77, 80; feudal, 
109-111, 113, 114, 132-138, 281, 284, 
454. 463; of Germany, 184, 185, 189, 
199. 235, 418, 422, 496; of France, 
309, 310, 319, 320, 373, 391-393, 396; 
of England, 344, 345, 351, 353, 359, 
374, 377, 383, 398, 399- 

Nominalists, 476 n. 

Norbert, archbishop of Magdeburg, 181. 

Noricum, 36, 41. 

Norman Conquest, 123, 338, 340, 341, 
342, 344- 

Norman-French language and litera- 
ture, 346, 379. 



Normandy, duchy of, 110, 193, 311, 312, 

314-316, 340, 341, 349-353, 358, 370, 

384, 387, 430. 
Normans, no; in England, 341, 344- 

350; in Sicily, 193, 194 n., 217, 268, 

271, 430. 
North mark, 187. 
Northampton, treaty of, 365. 
Northmen, 24, 42, 102, 104, 109-112, 

121, 132, 311, 427, 429. 
Northxmibria, 332-335, 337, 343- 
Norway, 24, 42, 237, 429, 430. 
Notre Dame of Paris, 329 and n. 
Novgorod, 427, 450. 
Nuremberg, 423. 

Octavian (Augustus), 10. 

Oder River, 7. 

Odo, count of Paris, 109, no, 112. 

Odovacer, 20, 38, 39, 43, 62. 

Offa, king of Mercia, 334. 

Old English, see Anglo-Saxon. 

Old French language and literature, 319, 

346, 485-489- 
Old Testament, 168, i6g, 242. 
Omar, caliph, 270. 
Ommeiades, 270. 
Oppenheim, 210. 
Ordeal, 44, 354, 465, 466. 
Ordination, 460. 
Orestes, 20. 
Oriflamme, 328. 
Orleans, city, 66, 314, 386, 387; duchy 

of, 397; duke of, 384, 385, 391. 
Orosius, 338. 
Osman Turks, 449. 
Osnabriick, bishopric, 86. 
Othman, caUph, 270. 
Otto I, the Great, 106-108, 184-189, 

308, 428. 
Otto II, 189, 190. 
Otto m, 189 n., 190, 195. 

Otto rv, 239, 240, 417. 

Otto, diike of Bavaria, 199, 200. 
Otto of Wittelsbach, 240. 
Owen Glendower, 382, 383 n. 
Oxford, university of, 425, 480, 481, 482. 

Pacific Ocean, 504. 

Paderborn, bishopric, 86. 

Paintingin the Middle Age, 495 ; in the 

Renaissance, 502. 
Palatine count, 417. 
Palestine, 268, 275, 297, 302, 304, 321; 

and see Crusades, Holy Land, Syria. 



542 



INDEX 



Pampeluna, 87. 

Pandects, 58. 

Pannonia, 36. 

Papacy, development of, 139-164; 

claims of, under Gregory VII, 201- 

203; under Innocent III, 236, 237; 

in the later Middle Age, 403-413. 
Papal elections, 161; decree of Nicholas 

II, 196, 197. 
Papal states, 140. 
Paper, 506. 
Parchment, 506. 
Paris, 66, 122, 311, 314, 321, 326-330, 

372. 
Parish, 457. 
Parisii, 326. 

Parlement, 320, 327; of Paris, 385. 
Parliament, 324, 353, 3SQ-362, 368, 373- 

378, 389, 399, 400, 401, 402, 40s, 406. 
Parthian.s, 14. 
Pascnal II, pope, 214. 
Pastoral Care, of Pope Gregory, 338. 
Patareni, 243. 
Patriarch, 140-144; of Constantinople, 

144; of Arabian clans, 253. 
Patrician, patricius, of Rome, 38, 82-85, 

160. 
Patrimony of St. Peter, 150, 154. 
Paul the Lombard, 471. 
Pavia, 84. 

Peace of God, 463, 464. 
rs Peasants, 69, 124, 128-132, 280, 314, 
^^ 318, 371, 372, 376-378; and see Serfs. 

Peasants' revolt of 1381, 376-378, 382. 
Pedro II, king of Aragon, 431, 432. 
Peers, 362. 
Pelagius, pope, 57. 
Penance, 279, 459, 464. 
Pentapolis, the, 155, 
Perceval, 488. 
Percy family (earls of Northumberland), 

383 and n. 
Persecutions of Christians, 28-30; see 

Jews, persecutions. 
Persia, Persians, 52-54, 254, 268, 272, 

446. 
Perugia, 155, 156, 157. 
Peter of Pisa, 471. 
Peter the Great, 428. 
Peter the Hermit, 282-284. 
Petrarch, 498. 

Petrine theory, 143, 144, 146, 333. 
Petrobrussians, 243. 
Philip I, king of France, 285, 313, 349, 

350. 



Philip II, Philip Augustus, 237, 239, 241, 

315-319, 353, 356, 357, 358, 367; on 

third crusade, 297. 
Philip III, 322. 
Philip IV, Philip the Fair, 322, 324- 

326, 329, 364, 365, 367, 368, 389; and 

Boniface VIII, 404, 405. 
Philip V, 322. 
Philip VI, 369, 371- 
Philip of Suabia, emperor, 234, 238, 239, 

300, 425. 
Philip the Good, duke of Burgimdy, 385. 
Phihppine Islands, 504. 
rhilosophy, Greek, in asceticism, 165- 

170; among the Mohammedans, 273; 

Anselm, 347; Greek, in the Middle 

Age, 469, 475-479; in the imiversi- 

ties. 475-479. 
Phrygia, 48. 

Physical geography of Europe, 1-9. 
Physics, 274. 
Piacenza, council at, 277. 
Pilgrimages, 193, 275, 276, 278, 280, 

453, 454, 503- 
Pippin of Landen, mayor of the palace, 

73-76. 
Pippin (II), mayor of the palace, 74-76, 

77- 

Pippin, king of the Franks, 80-83, 157- 
160, 163. 

Pippin, son of Charlemagne, 85. 

Pippin, son of Ludwig the Pious, 102. 

Plains, effect on history, 5, 6. 

Plantagenet line, 353 n. 

Plato, 166, 306, 476. 

Plautus, 500. 

Plebs, Roman, 17. 

Plectrude, 77. 

Po River, 2, 21, 81. 

Poitiers, 373; battle of, 371. 

Poitou, county of, no, 241, 322. 

Poland, 6, 190, 191, 237, 419, 421, 426- 
428, 433- 

Poles, 26, 164, 186, 190. 

Poll tax, 378. 

Pomerania, 427. 

Ponce de Leon, 504. 

Pontifex maximus, title of Roman em- 
peror, II. 

Poor Men of Lyons, 243. 

Poor Priests of Wyclif, 377. 

Pope, 139-164, 458; origin of name, 
142 n.; and see Papacy, etc. 

Portcullis, 134. 

Portugal, 32, 431, 503. 



INDEX 



543 



Portuguese discoveries, 449, 503, 504. 

Prague, university of, 425. 

Preaching, 245. 

Prefect of the city (Rome), 152. 

Prefectures, 16, 17, 141. 

Premonstratensians, 181. 

Pretorian guard, 14. 

Pretorian prefect, 16, 17, 50. 

Prevot, 318; of the king in Paris, 328; 

of the merchants in Paris, 328, 372. 
Priest, 141, 142, 179, 204, 242, 244, 457, 

460. 
Prince of Wales, 364. 
Princeps, title of Roman emperor, 11. 
Printing, 506, 507. 

Private jurisdiction, 119, 127, 129, 339. 
Proconsular power of emperor, 10. 
Protestantism, 411. 
Provengal, 485. 
Provence, 66, 326, 395, 487 n. 
Prussia, 5, 42, 304, 423, 427. 
Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals, 148 n. 
Ptolemy, astronomy of, 274, 323, 474. 
Punjaub, 268. 
Purgatory, 243. 
Pyrenees Moimtains, 2, 78, 268, 309, 

312, 430. 

Quadi, 41. 
Quadrivivim, 470. 
Quintilian, 474. 

Rachis, king of the Lombards, 156. 

Raoul Glaber, 491. 

Ratiger, 36, 37- 

Ravenna, 22, 53, 81, 82, 142, 155, 156, 

491. 
Raymond, count of Toulouse, 286-293. 
Realists, 476 n. 

Rector of the university, 480, 481. 
Red Sea, 446. 
Regalia, see Crown rights. 
Reginar, duke of Lorraine, 114. 
Regular clergy, 181. 
Religion, in the Roman empire, 28. 
ReUgious drama, 489, 490. 
Renaissance, 306, 482, 493, 495, 496- 

508; popes of, 411-413. 
Renaissance architecture, 501, 502. 
Rheims, 64, no, 386. 
Rhine league, 422. 
Rhine River, 7, 22, 34, 39, 309, 326, 332, 

395- 
Rhodes, 304. 



Rhone River, 3, 7, 38, 310, 395, 396, 
446. 

Richard I of England, Richard Lion- 
heart, 233, 239, 315, 316, 357, 367; 
on the third crusade, 297, 298. 

Richard II, 373-378, 425- 

Richard III, 401. 

Richard, duke of York, 399. 

Richard Neville, earl of Warwick, 394, 
400. 

Richard of Cornwall, 418. 

Ripen, bishopric, 186. 

Ripuarian Franks, 61. 

Rivers, importance of, as highways, 7, 

451- 
Roads, 451, 452. 

Robber barons, 314, 319, 419, 422. 
Robert, king of France, 313. 
Robert Bruce, the elder, 364. 
Robert Bruce, king of Scotland, 365, 

368. 
Robert of Normandy, 349-352; on the 

first crusade, 287. 
Robert, coimt of Flanders, 287. 
Robert Guiscard, diike of Sicily, 164, 

193, 212, 287. 
Rochelle, 373. 

Roger, king of Sicily, 164, 217, 218, 287. 
Roger Mortimer, 365. 
Roland, 137, 486. 
Rolf the Northman, no. 
Roman Catholic church, 33; in England, 

334-337- 

Roman emperor, powers, 10-14; wor- 
ship of, 16, 28 n. 

Roman empire, 10-23, 308, 331. 

Roman law, 32, 43, 469; mediaeval re- 
vival of, 58, 222, 228, 313, 322, 323, 
498 n. 

Roman legions, 14, 36. 

Roman mxmicipalities, 12. 

Roman provinces, 10, 12, 13, 16, 141. 

Roman senate, 10-16, 152. 

Roman senator, 18. 

Romance languages, 24 n., 32, loi, 483- 

485. 
Romanesque architecture, 348, 491, 492. 
Rome, city of, 10, 22, 36, 83-85, 89, 90, 

106-108, 139-145, 152, 195, 196, 218- 

220, 224, 238, 407, 500. 
Romulus Augustulus, 20, 38, 62. 
Roncaglian plain, 228. 
Roscelin of Compiegne, 476 n. 
Rouen, 384. 
Rovunania, 32, 429. 



544 



INDEX 



Rudolf, king of Upper Burgundy, log- 
in. 
Rudolf III, king of Burgundy, 192. 
Rudolf of Hapsburg, 414, 418, 419. 
Rudolf of Rheinfelden, 212. 
Rugians, 39. 4i- 

Rule of St. Benedict, 175-178, 467. 
Runnymede, 359. 
Rurik, 427. 

Russia, s, 427, 428, 430, 433, 434. 
Russians, 26, 147. 

Sacerdotal character of the clergy, 147, 

179, 460. 
Sacraments, 180, 458-460. 
St. Augustine, bishop of Hippo, 177, 180, 

470. 
St. Augustine, missionary to the Eng- 
lish, see Augustine. 
St. Benedict, rule of, 175-178, 467. 
St. Bernard, see Bernard of Clairvaux. 
St. Boniface, see Boniface, missionary 

to the Germans. 
St. Denis, 328. 
St. Dominic, 243, 461-463. 
St. Francis, 219, 461-463. 
St. Jerome, 174, 275. 
St. Louis, see Louis IX. 
St, Mark, 140. 
St. Paul, 168, 212, 263 n. 
St. Peter, 139, 140, 144, 144 n., 203, 

209, 212, 336, 335. 
St. Thomas Aquinas, 477, 478. 
St. Thomas of Canterbury (Thomas 

Becket), 355 n. 
Sainte Chapelle, la, 327. 
Ste. Genevieve, 328; abbey of, 329. 
Saladin, 231, 271, 296. 
Salerno, 193; university of, 480. 
Salian Franks, 61, 62. 
Salic law, 45; of succession, 369 n. 
Salt works, 186. 

Salzburg, archbishopric, 89, 191. 
Sant' Angelo, castle of, 212. 
Saracen, 272 n., 448. 
Saragossa, 87, 430. 
Sardinia, 88, 229, 249. 
Save River, 187. 
Savoy, duchy of, 326, 396. 
Saxons, 24, 41, 66, 67, 78, 80, 86, 95, 

146, 147, 485. 
Saxony, duchy of, 114. 182-184, 199- 

201, 239, 239 n.; duke of (elector), 

420. 
Scala family, 439. 



Scandinavia, 8, 147, 337. 

Scheldt River, 61. 

Schleswig, bishopric, 186. 

Scholasticism, scholastic system, 323, 
330, 478, 479. 

Schwyz, 423. 

Sclavania, 187. 

Scotland, Scotch, 4, 23, 325, 334, 338, 
344. 349, 350. 356, 361, 364, 367, 368, 
404, 430. 

Scottish Chiefs, The, 364 n. 

Scriptorium, 468. 

Sculpture, Gothic, 494, 495; Renais- 
sance, 502. 

Scutage, 355. 

Seas, effect on history, 5, 6. 

Secular clergy, 181. 

Seine River, 5, 7, 61, 311, 326, 384. 

Seneca, 12. 

Seljuk Turks, 276. 

SemUn, 283. 

Seneschal, 75, 184. 

Septimania, 87. 

Serf, 130-132, 312, 339, 37^378, 436, 
437. 

Serfdom, Roman, 17; feudal, 130-132, 
376-378, 380. 

Sergius I, pope, 153 n. 

Servia, 417, 429, 433. 

Servians, 26. 

Seven electors, see Electors. 

Seven Uberal arts, 470-474. 

Seville, 271, 430; university of, 472. 

Sforza family, 432, 439. 

Shakespeare, 379, 387 n. 

Sheriff, 339, 343, 346, 349, 353, 360. 

Shire, 25, 333, 339, 343, 346, 353- 

Shire-court, 333, 339, 342, 343, 346, 352, 
3S3-35S, 360, 389. 

Sicily, 88, 154, 164, 193; Mohammedans 
in, 192-194, 268; Norman kingdom 
of, 217, 218; Hohenstaufen in, 231, 
238, 240, 246-251; Angevin kingdom 
of, 321, 431, 432. 

Sidon, 303. 

Siegfried, 489. 

Siena, 443. 

Sigibert of Austrasia, 72. 

Sigismund, emperor, 426. 

Silk culture, 59. 

Silvester I, pope, 161. 

Silvester III, pope, 195. 

Simon de Montfort, 361, 364. 

Simony, 203-205, 245. 

Sirmium, 17. 



INDEX 



545 



Sisinnius, pope, 156. 

Sixtus IV, pope, 412. 

Slavs, 3, 26, 42, 54, 55, 86, 112, 121, 147, 
184, 186, 187, 190, 304, 421. 

Sluys, battle of, 370. 

Socrates, 166. 

Soissons, 66, 80. 

Song of Roland, 87. 

Spain, 2, 6, 395, 430, 431; language of, 
32; West Goths in, 36, 53, 145; Mo- 
hammedans in, 37, 87, 88, loi, 268, 
271, 304, 430, 431, 472; Charlemagne 
in, 87, 88; and Innocent III, 237; 
explorations, 504. 

Spanish mark, 87, 430. 

Speier, 210, 211. 

Spoleto, 81, 85, 105, 15s n-. 156, 159, 
194 n. 

Spolia, 231. 

Squire, 135. 

Stained glass, 495. 

States General, 324, 372, 388-390, 396, 

405- 

Statute of Laborers, 377. 

Statute of Praemunire, 380, 406. 

Statute of Provisors, 380, 405. 

Statutes, 363. 

Stephen III, pope, 82, 157. 

Stephen IV, pope, 84. 

Stephen IX, pope, 196. 

Stephen, leader of the Children's Cru- 
sade, 301. 

Stephen of Blois, king of England, 352; 
on the first crusade, 287. 

Stephen, king of the Himgarians, 164. 

Stephen Langton, archbishop of Can- 
terbury, 358, 359- 

Stilicho, 35-37- 

Stirrup episode, 224. 

Stoic philosophy, 12, 166, 167. 

Strasburg oaths, 103. 

Siudium generale, 480, 482. 

Stuttgart, 222 n. 

Styria, duchy of, 419. 

Suabia, duchy of, 63, 102, 114, 182-184. 

Suabians, 38. 

Suevi, 24, 37, 38, 77, I4S- 

Suffragan bishops, 140, 190. 

Sultan, 270, 271. 

Summa TheologuB of Thomas Aquinas, 
478, 479. 

Sunday, 30. 

Surah, chapter of the Koran, 257-260, 
263-267. 

Sussex, 332. 



Sutri, 155 n., 195- 

Sven Forkbeard, king of Denmark, 340. 

Sweden, 24, 42, 423, 429, 430. ___ 

Swiss confederation, 394. 
Switzerland, 2, 4, 63, 415, 417 n., 423. 
Syagrius, 62. 
Symmachus, 41. 

Syria, 123, 268, 276, 292, 303; and see 
Holy Land, Palestine. 

Tacitus, 24, 429. 

Taille, 389. 

Tancred of Lecce, 287-291. 

Tancred of Sicily, 232-234. 

Tapestries, 369. 

Tarsus, 289. 

Tassilo, duke of Bavaria, 88. 

Taxation, Roman, 18; of Frederick II 
in Sicily, 249; French, 312, 325; Par- 
liament's control over, 362, 375 ; papal, 
407, 413; of clergy, 404, 405. 

Templars, 303, 304, 327, 329, 421. 

Temple (Paris), 329. 

Temporal power of the pope, 81, 82, 84, 
85, 139, 140, 148, 150-153, 161, 197, 
201, 202, 403-413, 

Tennyson's Idylls of the King, 488 n. 

Terence, 323, 

Tertry, battle of, 74, 76, 77. 

Tewksbury, battle of, 400. 

Thames River, 332, 339. 

Theodahad, 52. 

Theodora, wife of Justinian, 51. 

Theodore of Tarsus, 335. 

Theodoric the Great, king of the East 
Goths, 39-41, 63, 151 n., 470. 

Theodosius I, 20, 31, 48. 

Theodosius II, 23, 57. 

Theology, 474-479- 

Theophano, wife of Otto II, 189. 

Theudebert, king of the Franks, 67. 

Theuderich, king of the Franks, 65-67. 

Thomas a Kempis, 461. 

Thomas Aquinas, see St. Thomas. 

Thrace, 21, 48, 49, 55. 

Thuringia, 76. 

Thuringian Forest, 42. 

Thuringians, 40, 41, 66, 78, 95. 

Tithes, 231. 

Togrvd Beg, sultan, 270. 

Toledo, 271. 

Tolls, 129, 185, 229, 452. 

Tortosa, 303. 

Toulouse, count of, 123, 312, 317, 320; 
county of, 311, 317, 320, 322, 487. 



546 



INDEX 



Touraine, county of, 311. 

Toumai, 62. 

Tournaments, 136, 454, 487, 488. 

Tours, battle of, 78, 268. 

Tower of London, 400, 401. 

Transubstantiation. 244, 477 n. 

Treaties, Verdun (843), 103, 309; Meer- 
sen (870), 105; Constance (1153), 
224, 225; Constance (1183), 230; San 
Germane (1230), 248; Northampton, 
(1328), 365; Bretigny (1360), 372; 
Troyes (1420), 385; Westphalia 
(1648), 424- 

Treves, 17, 62; archbishop of , 184; elec- 
tor, 420. 

Tribonian, 57, 58. 

Tribunician power of the Roman em- 
peror, 10. 

Tribur, council at, 210. 

Triest, 299. 

Trigonometry, 274, 

Trinity, doctrine of, 45, 46, 57, 244, 476, 
477 n. 

Tripolis, 293. 

Tristan and Isolde, 488 n. 

Trivium, 470, 

Trojan War, 137, 486. 

Troubadours, 487 n. 

Troyes, treaty of, 385. 

Truce of God, 281, 464. 

Tudor monarchs, 401, 402. 

Tunis, 303, 321. 

Turanian, 26. 

Turks, 27, 55, 270, 272, 276, 277, 278, 
280, 281, 284-307, 428, 429, 449, 503. 

Tuscany, 85, 211. 

Tusculan family, 195. 

Twelve Commandments of the Koran, 
265. 

Tyrol, 419. 

Uhud, battle of, 261. 

Ulfilas, 46. 

Unatn Sanctam, 405. 

Universals, question of, 476 and n. 

Universities, 474, 480-483, 500; of 

Bologna, 222; of Oxford, 425, 480, 

481, 482; of Paris, 329, 478, 479; of 

Salerno, 480. 
Unterwalden, 423. 
Ural Mountains, 3. 
Ural-Altaic peoples, 26, 
Urban II, pope, 213; and first crusade, 

277-280. 



Urban VI, pope, 407, 408. 
Uri, 423. 
Usury, 245. 

Vandals, 22, 24, 37, 40, 43, 45, 46, 52, 

i45» 485. 
Vasco da Gama, 504. 
Vassal, vassalage, 97, no, 124-128, 191, 

193. 194, 208, 217, 312, 316, 345, 353, 

367. 
Vellum, 506. 
Venice, 82, 94, 143, 155, 157, 294, 299- 

301, 306, 307, 431-433, 447, 448, 44Q- 
Verden, bishopric, 86. 
Verdun, treaty of, 103, 309. 
Vergil, 32, 323, 347, 470, 474, 498, soo. 
Verona, 53, 439. 
Vicar of St. Peter (pope), 164. 
Victor II, pope, 194 n. 
Vienna, 429. 
Vienne, county of, 396. 
Vigilius, pope, 57, 149 n. 
Village, see Manor. 
Visconti family, 432, 439. 
Vision of Piers Plowman, The, 377 n. 
Vistula River, 3, 7. 
Volga River, 7, 8, 446. 
Vosges Mountains, 38. 

Waimar of Salerno, 193, 194 n. 

Waldensians, 243. 

Wales, Welsh, 331, 332, 338, 344, 350, 

356, 361, 363, 364, 382, 383, 488. 
Walia, 36. 

Wallace, Sir Wilham, 364. 
Walter the Penniless, 282-284. 
War of the Roses, 387, 397-402. 
Wartha River, 427. 
Warwick, Richard Neville, earl of, 394, 

400. 
Wat Tyler, 378. 
Wearmouth, monastery of, 336. 
Welf, count, 102. 
Welsh language, 331. 
Wessex, 332-334, 337, 34°, 343- 
West Goths, 22, 24, 34-37, 40, 43, 45. 

46, 53-55, 64, 65, 118, 145, 268, 310- 
WilUam I, king of England, William the 

Conqueror, 164, 315, 341, 344-35°. 

353, 430. 
William II, William Rufus, 350, 351. 
William, king of Sicily, 225. 
William II, king of Sicily, 232. 



INDEX 547 



William of Champeaux, 477 n. York, archbishopric, 336. 

William of Holland, anti-king of Ger- Yorkist line, 397, 399-401. 

many, 250, 417. Ypres, 369. 
Winfred (Boniface), 146; see Boniface. 

Witenagemot, 339, 341, 346, 360. Zacharias, pope, 80. 

Witiges, king of the East Goths, 66. Zara, 299. 

Wool trade of England, 369. Zeitz, mark of, 187. 

Worms, 62, 438; council at, 209. Zeno, 20, 23, 50. 

Wiirzburg, bishopric, 147. Zero, 273. 

Wyclif, John, 379, 380, 406, 425, 460. Zwentibold, king of Lorraine, 113. 



\ 



^ 



^ RD-181 




Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: mav 9ono 

^^ "^ PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 



^ 

-> 



/70^\ "770 01 






















aITgustine ^ G^ o 'o , ,* A, ^ 

32084 *mi/^ " .^ V o' "^^1)%'^ '^^ « 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




009 490 298 8 




